Twist Posted December 28, 2018 Posted December 28, 2018 8 hours ago, Huntster said: I believe that at least 90% or more of the reports are lies and misidentifications. Perhaps 1% are hoaxes. Maybe 5% are kooks who believe their imaginations. If just one report is the real thing, whether yesterday or 40 years ago, this is the real thing. I believe it is the real thing. Zero arguments from me on this point. How much value then do you put into the collection of BFRO reports or the SSR?
ShadowBorn Posted December 28, 2018 Moderator Posted December 28, 2018 Twist 4% is what he puts in on all other reports of the collections of BFRO and SSR. So this really is not a bad number to believe in as far s I am concern. Seems very reasonable.
Huntster Posted December 28, 2018 Posted December 28, 2018 3 hours ago, Twist said: .........How much value then do you put into the collection of BFRO reports or the SSR? The most complete database possible of reports is critical. It is the only tool that can provide patterns, trends, and information, since scientific data is unavailable. The BFRO database includes investigators looking into new reports, so there is at least some kind of filter that might weed out intentional hoaxes or clear misidentifications.
Twist Posted December 28, 2018 Posted December 28, 2018 I agree with all you say, I just have reservations in regards to false reports effecting patterns and such but I suppose there is not much that can be done short of extreme measures such as polygraphs, I don’t see that being a viable means of vetting reports.
Huntster Posted December 28, 2018 Posted December 28, 2018 I agree that weeding through reports for accuracy is difficult to impossible, but that’s another reason to simply list them if it isn’t obviously a hoax, like for example, the witness saying that the Bigfoot emerged from a spaceship that landed before their eyes, then morphed into a caterpillar as they watched, then asked about the Raiders/Chiefs score in Portuguese. Remarkably, when one plays with SSR, and especially when one maps the results of queries, patterns jump out regularly. That actually indicates that more than 4% or 5% reports are accurate and not false. Another interesting aspect not widely discussed are all the reports in local newspapers that never make it into databases like John Greens or BFRO.
ShadowBorn Posted December 28, 2018 Moderator Posted December 28, 2018 That still not going to raise the reports as being true though. Since news articles are only there to grab the attention of their viewers. Maybe .05% might be true of what they report and I might not even be close to that since it might even be lower. John Green goes in with the 1% of the stories that are told since there is no way on how he vetted those stories. In my own persona on the way that I take in what people tell me about these creatures is on what I have personally experience with them. This is why I am confident with 4% are true and if I go with what is told of in the past like in the 1800's then hat percent is even higher.
gigantor Posted December 28, 2018 Admin Posted December 28, 2018 3 hours ago, ShadowBorn said: Maybe .05% might be true of what they report and I might not even be close to that since it might even be lower. I read somewhere that 76% of all statistics are made up. 1
norseman Posted December 28, 2018 Admin Posted December 28, 2018 But good trackways? That do crazy stuff...... like step over 4 strand barb wire fences, slide down cliffs, and sink deep into the ground, or stride effortlessly thru deep snow? Are not as easily explained away as anecdotal witness reports. Mind you not the smoking gun. But it might get us there if acted upon?
ShadowBorn Posted December 28, 2018 Moderator Posted December 28, 2018 Oops, Sorry my mistake .14% might be true what the news reports on sightings and what people are willing to believe. Since people can be so gullible in what they read so this has to be added. Do I have this right where it is that it means 99.86% to be false and the rest to be true since people are willing to believe anything with out putting the effort in learning the truth. Now I am not trying to say that people are dumb but they are not placing effort in learning the truth and believing what is being told. A big difference there. 28 minutes ago, norseman said: But good trackways? That do crazy stuff...... like step over 4 strand barb wire fences, slide down cliffs, and sink deep into the ground, or stride effortlessly thru deep snow? Are not as easily explained away as anecdotal witness reports. Mind you not the smoking gun. But it might get us there if acted upon? Get us there when they are fresh and can track them when feasible and possible. 1
Twist Posted December 28, 2018 Posted December 28, 2018 30 minutes ago, norseman said: Mind you not the smoking gun. But it might get us there if acted upon? For sure a possibility, the right tracks found by the right person/group and the rest could be history. 2
Huntster Posted December 29, 2018 Posted December 29, 2018 2 hours ago, norseman said: But good trackways? That do crazy stuff...... like step over 4 strand barb wire fences, slide down cliffs, and sink deep into the ground, or stride effortlessly thru deep snow? Are not as easily explained away as anecdotal witness reports........ A trackway that Byrne found and followed for over a mile in snow actually walked along a downed tree, then jumped to another downed tree several feet away, then walked down that one. Sorry. AFAIC, that’s hoax proof. 2
MindSquatch Posted December 29, 2018 Posted December 29, 2018 14 minutes ago, Huntster said: A trackway that Byrne found and followed for over a mile in snow actually walked along a downed tree, then jumped to another downed tree several feet away, then walked down that one. Sorry. AFAIC, that’s hoax proof. Interesting, I once followed some bear tracks behind my cabin in the Sierra mountains in the snow and the bear went out of it's way to a down pine tree to walk on it as if it was having fun doing so. Maybe the Bigfoot's do the same? If I'm near a fallen tree, I will go get on it and walk as far as I can go. By walking on the tree, I get a better view of what's around me by being higher up, plus it's fun.
norseman Posted December 29, 2018 Admin Posted December 29, 2018 (edited) It can be dangerous in the Pac NW without cork boots. End up with a stob in yer rear. Edited December 29, 2018 by norseman
Huntster Posted December 29, 2018 Posted December 29, 2018 15 minutes ago, norseman said: It can be dangerous in the Pac NW without cork boots......... That’s almost exactly what Byrne wrote. In fact, he said that the jump from one log to the other appeared impossible without cork boots.
Recommended Posts