Jump to content
ShadowBorn

Has this been asked about the PGF before

Recommended Posts

Incorrigible1

There are two genders. Your basic plumbing determines that.

There seems to be a multitude of mental disorders.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
norseman
9 minutes ago, ShadowBorn said:

Huntster

About your remark of transsexualism and sasquatch. With transsexualism it is some thing that we have to accept in todays society that some how was thrown upon us. whether we like it or not we have to accept them for who they are. There is no biology that explains why they are the way they are.  Sasquatch is just a being that has not been fully recognized as a living being by biologist but known as mystical creature that has been seen by thousands of people. People who claim they have seen a live breathing flesh and blood creature roaming our wilderness.  A creature that was filmed by two witnesses on horse back. That later had evidence of their claim of this creature. That was backed by other witnesses who went back to the scene and found more evidence that proved more then what was on that creek bed.

 

I am sure that there are  a few people here on this forum that know the after math of what was witnessed. What is on that film is real just as real there are as those transsexuals that biologist cannot explain. Just as real as when I sat in my deer stand with my bow in hand and looked below me to see what was breathing so heavy that I could hear it twenty feet up in a tree.

 

There is way more that took place back then after the filming at bluff creek that I am not sure has been told. But it is not my place to tell it and am hoping for some one else with more back ground to tell it. This would confirm to me what was told to me. I am not sure if John Green knew about this info. I have read his book but not read about this anywhere of what took place at bluff creek afterwards following the filming and the tracking of the creature. It is all in the details and it is all about the behavior of the creature that makes this so interesting.  You wonder why I am blown away by these creatures. Cause, it makes me wonder who is studying who. It also makes me wonder that if this creature was watching Rogers and Bob all along the whole time before it was filmed. Horses are smart and sensitive to things . Norseman, you know your horses and you understand horses. So if their horses started to get nervous then what caused that? I am sure their main will stand up or their ears will twitch or their tail. maybe let out a snort or do some thing odd. I am looking for behavior .   

 

Depends.

 

The crick was noisy, Patty was in a depression and the wind could have been blowing the wrong way. The reports say Rogers horse spooked.

 

I think they all spooked each other and Patty left for the hills. 

 

Horses and mules generally are good at detecting things long before you do. But there are exceptions. And human eye sight is better. But smell and hearing are much worse. Some younger horses and mules will spook over a stump or a rock. A boogie man that jumps to life to get them. Only to realize it is nothing and then they settle back down. Mules are better in the mountains because they have a fight or flight response. Horses being swift plains animals are generally just a flight animal. 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Huntster
12 hours ago, Incorrigible1 said:

There are two genders. Your basic plumbing determines that.

There seems to be a multitude of mental disorders.

 

My points stand:

 

1) The biology is simple, unmistakable, and unarguable

2) Like with sasquatchery, the biologists are completely MIA with regard to the issue

3) They appear quite comfortable with letting the psychologists take the ideological heat on this with no supporting them whatsoever

4) Both biologists and psychologists appear to be smarter than climatologists when it comes to dipping their toes (or, worse, plunging headlong) into political and ideological hot tubs

5) Biologists (especially the official government variety) had better hope (pray?) that (a) sasquatches don't go extinct under their watch, and/or (b) they are determined to be of the genus Homo after discovery (and thus not fully "wildlife", thus distributing the current gross negligence to other scientific disciplines)...........

 

.........because.........

 

I may not be able to catch a sasquatch myself and drag it through their official gauntlet to discovery, and I may not be able to shame the cowards enough here to get them to act, but I can damned sure continue to poison the hot tub until it's hopefully a boiling cauldron of witch's brew that is so toxic that it keeps them up at night. 

 

Cowards..........

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
SweatyYeti
On 6/10/2019 at 3:47 PM, norseman said:

 

That still doesn’t mean that Sweaty Yeti isnt a complete oxymoron. If proof isn’t important to him then why fly the drone in the face of Bigfoot? Ummm.... it must be of some importance to him then? Probably so he can talk about another bunch of pixels for another 50 years.

 

I consider 'Proof' to be very important, Norse.   What you don't seem to be getting....(in the point I have been making)....is that Proof does not need to come by way of a lazy-brained Official Scientist...(who will not engage in the act of scientific analysis, but instead....can only respond to a physical specimen.)

 

'Proof' can be the result of 'scientific analysis'....without any trained Scientists ever getting involved in the analysis. Amateur scientists can make discoveries, studying video footage.

 

 

Quote

A drone should represent a means to an end. Versus simply perpetuating the mystery further. IMHO.

 

That's what I think drones can...and will do....provide an answer to this mystery.

 

I think it'll take years...but, as time goes on, usage of drones will only increase.....at an exponential rate.   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Twist
6 minutes ago, SweatyYeti said:

I consider 'Proof' to be very important, Norse.   What you don't seem to be getting....(in the point I have been making)....is that Proof does not need to come by way of a lazy-brained Official Scientist...(who will not engage in the act of scientific analysis, but instead....can only respond to a physical specimen.)

 

'Proof' can be the result of 'scientific analysis'....without any trained Scientists ever getting involved in the analysis. Amateur scientists can make discoveries, studying video footage.

 

Personal proof, sure.  Proof on a government scale is going to require real scientist.  For sure an amateur scientist can provide the evidence but the declaring it an actual species will take more than amateur declarations.   

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
norseman
31 minutes ago, SweatyYeti said:

 

I consider 'Proof' to be very important, Norse.   What you don't seem to be getting....(in the point I have been making)....is that Proof does not need to come by way of a lazy-brained Official Scientist...(who will not engage in the act of scientific analysis, but instead....can only respond to a physical specimen.)

 

'Proof' can be the result of 'scientific analysis'....without any trained Scientists ever getting involved in the analysis. Amateur scientists can make discoveries, studying video footage.

 

 

 

That's what I think drones can...and will do....provide an answer to this mystery.

 

I think it'll take years...but, as time goes on, usage of drones will only increase.....at an exponential rate.   

 

Show me precedence!

 

Amateur naturalists absolutely have made discoveries with bullets, butterfly nets, fishing nets, cages, hair and scat samples and even picks, trowels and brushes...... In fact that’s generally how it’s done. The scientist sits back at the university and checks his mailbox every day. While the undergrads toil in the field.

 

But show me a cryptid species that was proven REAL by video analysis...... Yeti? Lock ness monster? Yowie? Ogopogo? 

 

You have a inflated perception of your own self worth. I like much of your work, not that I always agree with it. But you think what your doing with video analysis is the key to unlock the mystery! Which is quite laughable. I do not like belittling you or your work. Again I think the PGF is real and you and others have helped with that belief. But holy cow! Drones may very well be an answer to the mystery because a swarm of them is out there taking blood samples of every animal in the forest...... but it won’t be because somebody’s drone had a video recorder.

 

Science needs physical proof. Whatever you think proof means to you? Doesn’t matter. I could care less what you or anyone else THINKS video proof means to them personally. It’s subjective..... left to the eye of the beholder. Nonsense. And neither does science.

 

If our world was still ran that way we would still be burning witches at the stake!

 

The PGF is very compelling. But it’s old. And we still have to get past our own prejudices and realize that physical proof is the ONLY key to the mystery. 50 years later that fact should be crystal clear but it’s not. And I blame people like you for muddying the waters. If shooting one isn’t your thing? Then use a different method to come up with physical proof. Shotgun brushes wired across trails for hair samples. Biopsy darts. Scat collection kit. Any of those things have the potential to unlock the mystery. Albeit less expedient than a bullet. 

 

Even the guys crunching the numbers at the SSR are doing their part. Getting ahead of the creature versus debating about something that happened 50 years ago.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Huntster
2 hours ago, Twist said:

.........Proof on a government scale is going to require real scientist.........

 

So Ptolemaic astronomy is proven science?

 

1 hour ago, norseman said:

..........Amateur naturalists absolutely have made discoveries with bullets, butterfly nets, fishing nets, cages, hair and scat samples and even picks, trowels and brushes...... In fact that’s generally how it’s done. The scientist sits back at the university and checks his mailbox every day. While the undergrads toil in the field.........

 

True, every word of it. And I have a problem with that. I don't like pompous sacks of self-inflated ego sitting on their asses defining the work of others, and I certainly don't like them doing so after decades of blocking that work, calling it mythical, and generally creating obstacles to it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Twist
3 hours ago, Huntster said:

So Ptolemaic astronomy is proven science?

 

Apples to oranges.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Huntster

Apples and oranges are both fruit. That's scientific fact. 

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
SweatyYeti
4 hours ago, norseman said:

 

But show me a cryptid species that was proven REAL by video analysis...... Yeti? Lock ness monster? Yowie? Ogopogo? 

 

 

 

Go to the 32:50 mark of this video....and you can hear the echolocating sounds made by a cryptid animal...."Champ"...

 

 

 

No bullets required. ;) 

 

If it's video you'd prefer, Norse....then this detail can do the job....(the film subject's inhuman 'arm proportion')...

 

F347-F360-ArmBend-Matt-AG1.gif

 

 

I don't have time right now, to explain why the proportion of the arm is out of 'human range'...but, it is.  :) 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Catmandoo

The video is 16 years old, and the research that it is based on is older.  How is Champie these days?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Faenor
2 hours ago, Huntster said:

Apples and oranges are both fruit. That's scientific fact. 

The only scientific fact is that the pgf is a hoax.  If you took the time to read the works of your betters who work in science you'd realize your faith in bigfoots and boogety men was in error.

 

  • Upvote 1
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Huntster
Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, SweatyYeti said:

 

F347-F360-ArmBend-Matt-AG1.gif

 

 

I don't have time right now, to explain why the proportion of the arm is out of 'human range'...but, it is.  :) 

 

Yes, it is, and tge frames you use to illustrate that fact are good choices. There were other frames as well, especially some of the ladt ones viewing her from behind as she was about to disappear into the forest that illustrated that fact. More, the arm length with the proper forearm and upper arm length combination, arms bending at the elbows, arm swing at the shoulders, shoulder width, and total mass all considered together essentially prove scientifically that the figure in the film cannot be a man in a suit in 1967.

 

But, despite all the BS to the contrary about what "science" needs or demands, this clearly isn't about science or the scientific method at all.

 

 

 

 

LOL..........I knew if I dragged that stinky bait around long enough, I'd get a sucker to grab it! I guess waiting around for ADFG to open this fishery while watching those sockeyes jumping out there created an overwhelming urge to troll something up..........

 

24 minutes ago, Faenor said:

The only scientific fact is that the pgf is a hoax.........

 

Where is this scientific proof?

 

Quote

.........

.  If you took the time to read the works of your betters who work in science you'd realize your faith in bigfoots and boogety men was in error.

 

Which "betters who work in science" do you refer to?

 

And, more importantly, what "faith" do you refer to? If you get whacked on the side of the head with a ball bat, do you then acquire faith in the existence of pain, or do you then gain scientific understanding in why Ted Williams was the best batter in Major League Baseball history?

 

(Honest question, there........I'm trying to understand the inner workings........or absence of same............in special folks like yourself........)

Edited by Huntster

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Huntster
46 minutes ago, Faenor said:

The only scientific fact is that the pgf is a hoax.  If you took the time to read the works of your betters who work in science you'd realize your faith in bigfoots and boogety men was in error.

 

Oh, I just began my research, and I'm learning that YOU are that esteemed "better"! I find this among your incredible writings:

 

 

So, clearly, it has been scientifically proven that Patterson filmed a chimp in a sasquatch suit? Or was it an orang? Gorilla? Gibbon?

 

Please fill us in, Mr. Man of Science........

 

 

........

Itsall crap and any scientist or person with half a brain can realize you cant prove anything from a grainy old film.........

 

Question:

 

Did 11 Americans walk on the moon?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Huntster

My suggestion, Mr. Man of Science, is to take your time, hightail it back over to ISF, and get some counseling and guidance before responding. You're going to need all the help you can get from your "betters". I intend to make a snack out of you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...