How Has This Forum Affected Your Belief In Bf?

[kitakaze]

Pine and ocean breezes, that's what this thread is. A big fat breath of fresh air. I just wanted to say that there are some really excellent opinions and thoughts shared by people who no longer believe and still do, both. Whether throwing pigs, coming to the door for garlic, or zapping poor researchers with infrablasts, Bigfoot is nowhere near as wild as Bigfootery. That's where the jungle is.

I would say to those who worry about the politics of Bigfootery and discovery of Bigfoot to take heart - Bigfoot, if a real North American mammal species, does not need enthusiasts to be discovered any more than bears needed bear enthusiasts to be found. Now, Bigfoot the myth is the kind of fun I think anyone can enjoy.

Hey, who wants to watch Manbeast?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jp-bD_Kjor8&feature=related

[Guest LAL]

Don't mean to threadjack, but Gigantopithecus only went extinct relative recently. 250,000 years ago or perhaps as recently as only 100,000 years ago. Otherwise, a stellar posting, Squatchdetective.

The forum has expanded much of my interest in the subject, but I am continually amazed at the "facts" posted about the creature's supposed habits and characteristics. Still, I very much enjoy the BFF!

Apparently Jack Rink was premature with that 100,000 year date but Gigantopithecus blacki is solidly dated to 300,000 years ago.

It's known from several jawbones (at least three, not just one) and over a thousand teeth. One thing this forum has done for me is to spur my collecting of books and DVDs again. I'm currently reading Other Origins by Russell Ciochon, John Olsen and Jamie James. Fascinating.

As far as this forum affecting my belief, it hasn't. I'm just as hardheaded as ever.

[Guest rockinkt]

I actually leaned towards believing until I began to spend time on the old BFF and came to understand that squatch "facts" are nothing of the sort.

I found that the old truism "keep repeating something and it will become the truth" is a very honest representation of the "facts" surrounding this myth.

People with no training, experience, skill, or certification are cited as "experts" with such stunning regularity that they are accepted as such. Farenbach for example. His notions concerning gross hair morphology is outdated and inaccurate; and, the fact that his "sasquatch hairs" are "indistinguishable from human hair" is such a dead giveaway as to make someone familiar with the topic belly laugh.

The idea that there exists a cross cultural myth throughout the North American Indigenous population about a giant hairy bi-pedal primate is an utter crock - yet people actually believe this and use it as a reason for "believing" when there is absolutely no validity to this "fact"! People actually cite other squatch believers and squatch websites without any realization that they are not citing real research that has been verified by in depth study and peer review! THE ACTUAL PEER REVIEWED RESEARCH IS TOTALLY IGNORED!

Of course - the fact that "beliefs" that are touted as being "real" by the squatch proponents that go hand in hand with the other "beliefs" that are purposefully and conveniently ignored is very telling.

Who on this board believes that Indian maidens were kidnapped by giant beavers and mated with and produced beaver/human offspring? (Algonquin). Why not? Why should that belief be less alluring than giant hairy bi-pedal primates kidnapped Indian maidens and produced offspring? Because it fits in with what you WANT to believe, of course.

What about Gods in the form of bears giving three Chiefs the ability to write and when discovering that the Chiefs did not share this knowledge with the people - turn them into a Giant Stone? (Sto:lo). Why not believe that story as much as the same tribe's story about squatches? Because it fits in with what you WANT to believe, of course.

I learned that the "Skookum Cast" was definitely an elk lay. No ifs and/or butts (pun intended) about it.

I learned that Chilcutt did a flawed analysis of casts of questionable provenance. He did not come even close to what he knows is the minimum standard of "evidence" with his so-called "dermal ridges" that were shown to be casting artifacts by actual dedicated researchers who followed tried and true research methods that are repeatable and falsifiable.

I learned that the so-called "Four Horsemen" were very poor in the way of research and interviewing skills. They were much more interested in self promotion and the being the first with the "find of the century" than any sort of real investigations. I learned that their lack of any proper investigative and proper research abilities has caused many of the problems in today's beliefs about this phenomenon. If anyone had bothered to ask: "Say Roger, exactly how did you get that film developed and here so fast?" - one of the greatest pieces of "evidence" would have been put to rest very quickly.

I learned that the vast majority of people have no idea what a living foot does when it hits the ground and lifts off in various soil types.

Most of all - I learned that "belief" is very much uninfluenced and uninhibited by the actual truth.

All this IMHO, of course.

edited for spelllink

Edited July 2, 2011 by rockinkt

[Guest shelley7950]

I was thinking last night (oops) and remembered a kid's book from the '50's called "David and the Phoenix"....the basic premise was that David moved into a new house and discovered and befriended a phoenix on the mountain behind the house...the two developed a relationship and went on various magical adventures, BUT, that major villain, the phoenix nemesis, THE SCIENTIST, with his pith helmet and binoculars and gun and prying ways, pursues the phoenix relentlessly and ultimately causes it to flee once again, leaving David bereft (that's right, we didn't have any fancy sugar coated happy endings in the 50's--don't forget "Bambi" and "Old Yeller"--just years of therapy later in life)

ANYHOW--seems to me that the fantasy element on this board came here not to discover the real BF (if it exists), but to share and re-inforce their private fantasy relationship with their personal BF...this would explain their often extreme reaction to the skeptics...not only are they frustrated with the skeptic's lack of belief, but the skeptic poses a real threat to their special relationship with BF....If the real BF was "discovered" tomorrow it would not be the skeptics who were depressed or had their world view shattered, it would be the extreme believers....

And that's what happens when you start thinking late at night

[Guest Cervelo]

I'm starting a Shelly fan club!

I've had three experiences in my life that has kept my interest in the subject. Everytime I go fishing, hunting, hiking or camping I see or hear something which makes me go that's cool but my first thought isn't Bigfoot. My experiences for some would be considered all but class A Bigfoot encounters but for me where just really fun, sometimes very scary outdoor adventures! As I've said many times go on a witch hunt and you will find witches! The bulk of what the fourm has revealed to me is how little most people know about the outdoors and it's wildlife but hey if biggie gets you outdoors and having a good time....enjoy!!

Edited July 2, 2011 by Cervelo

[Guest]

It really isn't our place to publically diagnose the psychological status of the members of the forum despite what personal opinions we may hold regarding them as a group in general or on an individual basis. I have been guilty of this in the past and I had to take a step back and re-evaluate my attitude for several reasons, "pot meet kettle" being one of them.

Delusional disorders can fall into several categories but belief in cryptids, ghosts, or the paranormal does not fit the criteria. I think it depends on the degree of the belief and other factors involved. Believing in bigfoot as a flesh and blood creature, and pursuing that creature, could put you in one of these delusional categories depending on how one might want to look at it.

As you well know, this topic attracts those that are not exactly balanced, that doesn't necessarily apply to everyone. It is hard to separate the wheat from the chaff so I take the approach of just not taking any of it too seriously. It is tricky for the moderators and admin to judge what is or isn't crossing the line with this rule so I doubt the issue will be resolved any time soon. Most forums don't allow any discussion whatsoever of the factors that might fall into the fantasy category. I give the new BFF directorship a salute for trying to do it in a fair and balanced way. The BFF admin/moderators may not be perfect, but I see the effort. My point is that I don't think it is right to just lump all of the people that don't share your POV in a fantasy prone category or i.e, delusional together . The opinion is most often based on forum posts, not intimate association.

Edited July 2, 2011 by Jodie

[bipedalist]

....but the skeptic poses a real threat to their special relationship with BF

...If the real BF was "discovered" tomorrow it would not be the skeptics who were depressed or had their world view shattered, it would be the extreme believers....

Maybe it was late night, and with all due respect, but this opinion/belief about "believers" is as good as fantasy gets on the other side of the coin, and as always JMHO in broad daylight.

My belief is as strong, if not stronger, than the day I decided to "arrive" months after a Class A sighting. Yes, I'm disenchanted with hoaxers and charlatans but it is all part of the landscape of bigfootery, some of which has an unwholesome history. And, in this respect, I tend to agree with Jodie re: the "fringe" element that seems to exploit BF and BF'ers and hangs on like a magnet. I'm truly hopeful that the day of reckoning is coming re: the judgment of what BF "is". Maybe then we can "shake" a few magnets. My fear (no, my nightmare) is that there will always be a niche for them however.

[Guest Knuck]

Upon reading these responses to the OP, I am seeing confirmed what I already knew. And what I suspect, most here with a discerning mind already knew.

I see those who have been influenced by "outside sources" to believe, or not believe, or just plain become more confused than they may have been regarding thier own thoughts and convictions on the subject of Sasquatch. I see those who have total and irreverent disbelief of what those who I call "knowers". I've also seen the arguments by SOME opponents, and **** good arguments too! I can easily see why some refuse to "believe" in so many (what they call and consider outlandish claims).

True, some have come here to spin yarns. Whether it be to confuse, or "muddy the waters", or just because they like to "hear" themselves talk. Some because they are lonely. Some because of ego/self esteem problems. Some of these discriptions apply to both skeptics, and proponents. NOT ALL of either side!! Just select ones. Some have magnificent educations, with letters in front of thier names. (On both sides of this.) Many would not publicly say what they say here. Some of these wouldn't risk ridicule, or public embarrasement, or have thier credentials put in question.

Some it is obvious, won't say or act in public as they say and act here. Because they know full well what the consequences would indeed be. Here they are relatively safe to play out thier little fantasy of being totally in control of thier world.

Some here have shown just how inconsiderate of others beliefs, feelings, and opinions. ON BOTH SIDES, and IN THE MIDDLE. Questioning someone's veracity has become the norm in a venue such as this. The politeness of not calling "liar" was lost a long time ago. If this forum was a live public situation, fisticuffs, and four-letter words would abound. Even worse I suspect, considering the level of convictions on all sides of this subject.

It all boils down to those that "KNOW", and those that just swear that "IT CAN'T BE SO!" Those poor souls stuck in the middle haven't a clue from one thread to the next which way to lean. Yes, there are those who "believe", they have "hope" and "doubt". Whether that is tangible or not in this given tug-of-war.

This forum shows that some are here for "entertainment". Some are here to seek knowledge. And they will get it. Knowledge of human nature, and behavior toward fellow man. Be it good or bad. It's all here. Mankind lost it's cohesiveness as a species, a long, long time ago, otherwise there wouldn't be wars, or different cultural beliefs, or diversity of thought. We will never be a single group, with common beliefs, and culture. Everyone will argue that thier ideas are more important, more intelligent, and truthful, than others present.

Until officially acknowledged as a living, breathing species, the consensus will be greatly mixed, and this forum will continue along it's same path. I won't say where that path is leading, as everyone has thier own idea of THAT direction.-Knuck

[Guest]

"About the BFF - Is it right for you?

>The BFF is an independent forum dedicated to the discussion of the Bigfoot phenomenon. While the Forum is independent, it is owned and operated by the Centre for Fortean Zoology which is not a Bigfoot research organization and has no official ties to any Bigfoot organization."

Being naieve, I actually think folks should read the stated positions of any forum they chose to post in or read. That said This is the internet.....LMAO!!! Anyone can post anything they chose for any reason and it's up to me to further research their positions or assertions. Notice I said the burden is on me? Personal responsibility ringing a bell for anyone here? (retorical question) It's my perogative to decern what I chose to believe in at all times, so the question of if the BFF has changed my mind in any way I personally feel is a non-question in regards to my personal worldview.

That is a very seperate question from "Do I enjoy the forum?"....which I do very much. I enjoy the heck out of it. Looking at ideas new to me, and reading others discussing them is a joy.

Seems to be lots of interesting folks here and I have never felt I HAVE to agree or disagree with them as I don't live or die by whether someone is right or wrong. I'm just here cause the topic of BF is interesting as all giddy-up! The posters here are diverse, the points of view cover ALL SPECTRUMS and I find that refreshing.

GJ

[Guest bsruther]

It really isn't our place to publically diagnose the psychological status of the members of the forum despite what personal opinions we may hold regarding them as a group in general or on an individual basis.

I have found that in my personal life, it is my place to identify judge and avoid those that do not have a firm grip on reality. I don't see this forum as being any different, in that respect. I don't see categories or levels of delusion, only reality and non-reality and make no apologies for being narrow minded. I believe you are right when you say they shouldn't be publicly diagnosed on an individual basis, but have no problem whatsoever calling them out for what they are in general. I enjoy the subject of Bigfoot as much as most folks, but the woowoos and their skewed view of reality just turn everything into one big circus, IMO. From reading the other posts on this thread, it appears that there are many others that also have a problem with these people and are speaking out, in general.

[Guest]

BSRuthers- I see your point, but I believe Shellie has no belief in bigfoot, whatsoever, which is her perogative, so my response was tailored to fit the situation. There are many posters that I don't think are fantasy prone that believe or know bigfoot exists and should not be dumped in with the likes of some of the more sensational posters on here, to put it kindly.

I call people out too, but I try not to label, just parse out what exactly they are saying, and form my private opinion based on that. Sometimes my opinion is evident whether I want it to be or not.

If the woowoo bothers you there is always that IGNORE button you can hit for the woowoo posts you don't care to read.

This might be something to consider, why not have a section devoted to alternative bigfoot theories with the clear caveat that the BFF is neutral or doesn't support that stance? Then like can stay with like, nobody feels disenfranchised, and peace and harmony can reign down on the BFF.

[Guest]

I have found that in my personal life, it is my place to identify judge and avoid those that do not have a firm grip on reality. I don't see this forum as being any different, in that respect. I don't see categories or levels of delusion, only reality and non-reality and make no apologies for being narrow minded. I believe you are right when you say they shouldn't be publicly diagnosed on an individual basis, but have no problem whatsoever calling them out for what they are in general. I enjoy the subject of Bigfoot as much as most folks, but the woowoos and their skewed view of reality just turn everything into one big circus,

And see? that's the beauty of the internet. Everyone has an opinion.

IMO. From reading the other posts on this thread, it appears that there are many others that also have a problem with these people and are speaking out, in general.

Insofar as everyone is entitled to their opinion, to a very valid degree "calling someone out" on their opinion is also a way to suppress their opinion and leads down the slippery slope of censorship. Whether by using peer pressure to achieve it, or encourage it. Being as this isn't a research affiliated forum, a little diversity never hurt anything and I've noticed the post counts go up in threads where the conversation is lively.

Of course the forum owners could always re-write the rules and this would become a more "restricted" forum, but I have also noticed forums of that genre regarding BF have small memberships and are hardly active. Just something to consider.......

[Guest bsruther]

And see? that's the beauty of the internet. Everyone has an opinion.

IMO. From reading the other posts on this thread, it appears that there are many others that also have a problem with these people and are speaking out, in general.

Insofar as everyone is entitled to their opinion, to a very valid degree "calling someone out" on their opinion is also a way to suppress their opinion and leads down the slippery slope of censorship. Whether by using peer pressure to achieve it, or encourage it. Being as this isn't a research affiliated forum, a little diversity never hurt anything and I've noticed the post counts go up in threads where the conversation is lively.

Of course the forum owners could always re-write the rules and this would become a more "restricted" forum, but I have also noticed forums of that genre regarding BF have small memberships and are hardly active. Just something to consider.......

You took what I said out of context. I didn't say "calling someone out". I was not talking about individuals, I was talking about the supernatural Bigfoot people, in general, not individually. Delving into semantics games, is also a slippery slope.

[Guest Cervelo]

BSRuthers- I see your point, but I believe Shellie has no belief in bigfoot, whatsoever, which is her perogative, so my response was tailored to fit the situation. There are many posters that I don't think are fantasy prone that believe or know bigfoot exists and should not be dumped in with the likes of some of the more sensational posters on here, to put it kindly.

I call people out too, but I try not to label, just parse out what exactly they are saying, and form my private opinion

based on that. Sometimes my opinion is evident whether I

want it to be or not.

If the woowoo bothers you there is always that IGNORE button you can hit for the woowoo posts you don't care to

read

This might be something to consider, why not have a section devoted to alternative bigfoot theories with the clear caveat that the BFF is neutral or doesn't support that stance? Then like can stay with like, nobody feels

disenfranchised, and peace and harmony can reign down

on the BFF

Jodie,

I consider you a friend and like minded cohort but I respectful say poo-poo:) on your PC correct position. I see no reason that on this fourm opinions either way should be held back. First the guidelines call out some of the assumptions before you wade into the deep end shall we say. Second if someone puts something out there and gets hammered to fing bad then they should have kept it to themselves (yes I did say it) this is not a Bigfoot therapy site maybe one should be started!

[bipedalist]

...this is not a Bigfoot therapy site maybe one should be started!

Yah, the BF's have been grumbling about the lack of therapists in the new PPO. They have offered free scholarships and post-docs to address the lack of available providers issue. It's becoming a real Guild issue.