Urban Bigfoot Seriously? (3)

[ShadowBorn]

Well with these things any thing is possible and what I have encountered with them it can be made by them with out anyone seeing them. Like I have said before that I had sat in a tree and had asked for these things to chase me in some deer. What ever was under my stand breathing the way it was I could not see. The darn thing had to have been cloaked like the predator. So if they have this capability then I find it perfectly possible for them to do what ioyza is talking about. What I saw in what was explained in it was how it could be used as a navigation tool.

 

The question that I want to ask is who is it that takes these structures down after they are built? Are they being built because you are taking special notice of them? Have you taken a compass reading to these structures ? I have notice in the photo that there was a imprint in the ground at about 20 yards north of the structure that looks circular. What I did not notice is that if this was done in the rain then why was there no prints left behind since that ground looks soft enough when wet to leave impressions within that medium. What I also notice in your photo was a linear imprints leading towards to that circular  spot impression in the grass. I kept these details to my self to see if any one else would have notice .What can people say who have not really dealt with these creatures except deny their existence. I have always been for  their behavior since we have no idea of what they are capable,

 

I am always thinking out side the box and this has always seem to have worked for me. We should not stick to a single avenue when there are many avenues that can be traveled. Do your research and be care full ioyza since they have an ability to think like us as Humans.

[Drew]

10 hours ago, MIB said:

 

 

What you do is trolling.  From Merriam-Webster: Definition of troll. 2 :a person who intentionally antagonizes others online by posting inflammatory, irrelevant, or offensive comments or other disruptive content. Internet trolls.

 

You have not offered a single thing of value, you just run around belittling others, derailing discussions.  You don't even ask intelligent questions, you just accuse.   Look in the mirror: you're the troll, not ioyza.  

 

MIB

 

Ironicalisms from MIB

 

 

Edited November 9, 2017 by Drew

[ioyza]

13 hours ago, Squatchy McSquatch said:

No publications, no proof, goodbye

 

You think I'd share the real name of myself or any colleagues in this context? Goodbye.

 

9 hours ago, JustCurious said:

ioyza, is there any history of a pyromaniac in the area?  I ask because that looks like someone was getting ready to start a fire there and may have been interrupted or maybe they were expecting the leaves to fall and were then going to torch the tree. 

 

I only offer that as a suggestion based on the fact I lived somewhere that had a pyromaniac and he'd tie twine to tree limbs and light it on fire trying to burn the tree.  He didn't do it all the time either, but tried it a couple times a year.

 

I'm not dismissing your speculation, but just offering food for thought.

 

Haha at least we're thinking outside the box now! I like it, hadn't thought of that one... I doubt that's it though. For one, I'd expect more of a circular teepee surrounding the trunk (although that IS closer to what they looked like last winter). Also, the structures last winter were in heavy precipitation (and potentially this one, if it was built one night earlier than I thought), so the timing doesn't add up. Beyond that... I dunno, they built something then got cold feet and just left it there, four times, without actually lighting anything?

 

Regarding the exchange between norse and OS, I don't think it's unreasonable to accept BF in Bachelor's Grove, Des Plaines River corridor, etc but reject them passing by UoC on location alone. Frankly, there IS sufficient forest for them to live and hide in those areas (and apparently sufficient food, as long as they move around), and there's not even enough cover to travel through here unexposed. Again, I was similarly dismissive when the first one appeared a year ago, yet my intuition about it made my heart skip a beat. Alarm bells went off Tuesday morning. It just looks right - doesn't anyone else have a sense of the aesthetics of their structures? I realize that's not a scientific approach, in a field that everyone seems desperate to approach scientifically, but honestly I've had a lot more tangible success following my intuition than trying to think through things. (Tangible meaning structures, encounters, glimpses - heck, ALL the findings and encounters at one of my main areas in Colorado would never have happened had I not gone back on instinct alone)

 

ShadowBorn, the structures never get touched as far as I can tell. Ah wait, not true - one of them had little strands of reed tied to it in odd places a day or two later (interpret that how you will). But humans don't seem to notice or care. The wind knocks them down eventually, and it looked like this one was already in a bit of disrepair as I drove by it this morning. And yes, if they can cloak like the Predator, a trip through Chicago would be a breeze, but these topics are best left for the (vv) other section of the forum, understandably.

[Squatchy McSquatch]

1 hour ago, ioyza said:

 

You think I'd share the real name of myself or any colleagues in this context? Goodbye.

 

 

Then neither you or your claims have any credibility. 

 

 

[hiflier]

 

1 hour ago, Squatchy McSquatch said:

 

Then neither you or your claims have any credibility. 

 

If I may jump in here? ioyza may think or speculate that it's Bigfoot that is creating these intermittent stick structures. Other members too. There is no proof of that right now of course so the CLAIM may not be credible but there is NO proof ioyza created these structures to hoax the BFF so ioyza's credibility should not be brought into question.

 

You do not think the structures were created by Bigfoot and that's perfectly fine. But to transfer that onto ioyza, or any one for that matter, requires proof of fabricating fake evidence as slim as the evidence might be. So, IMHO, ioyza's credibility is just fine. It's only the stick structures and their creators that are unknown and ioyza has a perfect right to get some ideas and feedback from the members in a quest to discover a possible or even likely answer to what's going on. No harm, no foul.

Edited November 9, 2017 by hiflier

[dmaker]

Or one could aim to poke fun at the community from the inside by noticing something that really beggars belief and present it as the result of bigfoot solely to highlight the credulity of the average footer. Especially when that extends to something as utterly ridiculous as this claim. This particular claim is so outlandish that it is hard to take the presenter seriously.

 

I have to say it is working. If someone would believe this stick pile in the middle of Chicago is the result of bigfoot, then there probably is not much they wouldn't believe in regards to bigfoot. 

 

Edited November 9, 2017 by dmaker

[hiflier]

47 minutes ago, hiflier said:

But to transfer that onto ioyza, or any one for that matter, requires proof of fabricating fake evidence as slim as the evidence might be

 

DANG! but I hate repeating myself. What people think or believe is their prerogative and that includes you or anyone else. Trying to police or tweak folks through intimidation or by attacking their character or what they believe does more harm than good. They will think and believe as they wish. Period. You've witnessed that for yourself for over 6,000 posts. So enough already, please?

 

If everyone is finished derailing this topic then, IMHO, this would be a fine time to get back on track and continue it.   

[Guest OntarioSquatch]

Contrary to what dmaker claims, no one here actually buys this, not even individuals who believe in the legitimacy of  certain “urban” reports. If ioyza is trying to fool people into believing that sasquatch are responsible for those experiences, then he’s failed completely. Basically, the people here are not as gullible as some of the denialists/ISFers like to think

[dmaker]

Ah, hiflier. Playing moderator again, I see. 

 

I wasn't policing anyone. I was explaining how ioyza could be perceived as a hoaxer without actually creating the stick pile. 

38 minutes ago, OntarioSquatch said:

Contrary to what dmaker claims, no one here actually buys this, not even individuals who believe in the legitimacy of  certain “urban” reports. If ioyza is trying to fool people into believing that sasquatch are responsible for those experiences, then he’s failed completely. Basically, the people here are not as gullible as some of the denialists/ISFers like to think

Really? You should speak to Leaftalker.

[hiflier]

I agree. But until someone can prove iozya is 'fooling' everyone then personal credibility perhaps shouldn't be publicly on the table. That's the point. People may look at the stick structures in the photos and have an OPINION that they are faked but until something is determined to be hoaxed by someone's own hand then public accusations serve no purpose and can be damaging to someone with honest intentions. Yeah, I know it's a fine point, but, in principle, only proof of intent to defraud should call someone's credibility into question. If this is hard to understand then read it again.

Edited November 9, 2017 by hiflier

[dmaker]

1 minute ago, hiflier said:

Yeah, it's a fine point but in principle only proof of intent to defraud  should call someone's credibility into question. If this is hard to understand then read it again.

It's not hard to understand. It was mentioned that there was no proof that iozya created the stick pile. I was simply describing how creating the stick pile is not necessary if the hoax was coming from a different angle. I never accused iozya of anything. I personally don't care one way or the other. The claim is ridiculous either way. 

[Drew]

31 minutes ago, OntarioSquatch said:

 Basically, the people here are not as gullible as some of the denialists/ISFers like to think

Quote

For the record, I believe there are sasquatch in the Chicago area, and that there’s a direct connection to the UFO phenomenon

 

 

Both by the same poster.

 

 

 

 

[dmaker]

LOL!!

 

[Incorrigible1]

Minuscule stacks of wood and twigs in a major metropolitan US city are causing some to defend the supposition it's constructed by a 600lb. unknown primate. It's beyond the pale. 

[ioyza]

1 hour ago, dmaker said:

Or one could aim to poke fun at the community from the inside by noticing something that really beggars belief and present it as the result of bigfoot solely to highlight the credulity of the average footer. Especially when that extends to something as utterly ridiculous as this claim. This particular claim is so outlandish that it is hard to take the presenter seriously.

 

I have to say it is working. If someone would believe this stick pile in the middle of Chicago is the result of bigfoot, then there probably is not much they wouldn't believe in regards to bigfoot. 

 

 

But of course you've said the same about much less audacious claims, and of course most of the general population would call the claim that bigfoot exists at all "utterly ridiculous." 

 

It's very easy to proclaim something to be utterly ridiculous. It's quite a bit more difficult to thoroughly and efficiently explain a fairly complicated situation and some involved out-of-the-box hypotheses about it, as I've attempted to do a couple times now. 

 

I would never set out to convince you of something like this, but I've also been clear about how much I value your opinion on it, or anything bigfoot-related. That's not because you're rude; that's because I've read what you have to say enough to know that you're so wildly far off-base with the way you think about this subject, that I'm totally uninterested in anything you have to say.

 

I think it should be pretty clear that sasquatch know a lot more about us than we do about them. The issue many people seem to have with furthering their understanding is filling in the gaps in their knowledge with assumptions. Based on what we know about how animals act, or how mammals act, or even how humans act, we think we can extend that to sasquatch, and say they MUST do this or they COULDN'T do that. Completely erroneous thinking.

 

The other big problem which is on ugly display here is a totally irrational paranoia of hoaxers. The people spending a LOT of time thinking and talking and writing about sasquatch are not out to make fun of anyone. This is a field of inquiry based almost entirely on human observations, and necessarily so. If you want to have any chance of understanding it, you have to learn to listen to people.

 

Could I be wrong about this? Sure, absolutely!!!!! I've said so many times. Take it with a grain of salt, file it away in your Limbo Bin, and move on with your day. If your sensibilities are so insulted, maybe your sensibilities need thicker skin.