Guest Forbig Posted July 6, 2011 Share Posted July 6, 2011 If there is a positive side to the show it is that a couple of well known videos and photos have probably been disproved by having Bobo stand in for the Bigfoot and finding that the supposed bigfoot was no larger than Bobo in height or mass. The Silverstar Peak episode, the McKenzie River Oregon video, and the one where Bigfoot grabs a candy bar from a stump come to mind. Maybe “disprove†is a bit strong a word, but the Bigfoot research community should no longer be using those as evidence for its existence. IMO If they start tossing everything that's questionable there won't be anything left to look at. If we question everything to death Bigfoot will turn out like an OJ or Casey Anthony trial. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Cervelo Posted July 6, 2011 Share Posted July 6, 2011 The only thing anyone can learn from this show is how not to hunt for anything. The only animals they have documented is by accident and they still didn't know what they we're looking at. Great show on what not to do IMO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Forbig Posted July 6, 2011 Share Posted July 6, 2011 The only thing anyone can learn from this show is how not to hunt for anything. The only animals they have documented is by accident and they still didn't know what they we're looking at. Great show on what not to do IMO. Can you name one other show in the history of television that has documented a proven sighting of Bigfoot? I still enjoyed it and I'm not alone, even though they don't admit it almost everybody that has complained has watched every episode beginning to end! First thing I do when I hate a show is turn the channel. What will we all do after the grand finally this Sunday? We'll have to wait until next season or maybe sooner if they really find Bigfoot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Cervelo Posted July 6, 2011 Share Posted July 6, 2011 (edited) Forbig, No I can't name any show that has proven Bigfoot is real. If Sunday's not a rest day I will be watching theTDF! I'm glad you like the show! I'm sorry you don't agree with my assessment of the show. BTW just because my post follows yours doesn't mean its directed at you. If I want to address something you've said I will use your name or quote in the future but your comments are always welcome! Edited July 6, 2011 by Cervelo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Forbig Posted July 6, 2011 Share Posted July 6, 2011 These are the Guidelines we use at Arizona Field Research Team Scientific Methodology Applied To Bigfoot Research There are fundamental steps science uses to solve problems, called The Scientific Method. These steps have been used for centuries to solve problems and develop theories. The Scientific Method, which is found in most entry level science textbooks, is the proven technique science uses to develop new ideas and prove discoveries. Most of the world's current technological success is due to this process, and there is no reason it can't be applied to Bigfoot research as well. Therefore by following these proven steps will help to find the solution to the Bigfoot mystery. Below are the basic steps of The Scientific Method, and how they could relate to our form of research. 1)DEFINE THE PROBLEM: FINDING THE SOLUTION TO THE BIGFOOT PHENOMENON. 2)DEFINE THE GOALS AND PLANS USED TO SOLVE THE PROBLEM WHICH IS AN ON-GOING PROCESS. 3)SEARCH, EXPLORE, AND GATHER EVIDENCE, OBTAIN REPORTS, AND DOCUMENT THE RESULTS. 4)USE LOGICAL ALTERNATIVE SOLUTIONS; MAKE ENOUGH FOLLOW-UP OBSERVATIONS TO RULE OUT ALL OTHER POSSIBILITIES, SUCH AS COMMON ANIMALS, MISIDETIFICATIONS, AND HOAXES. 5)EVALUATE THE EVIDENCE, IN ORDER TO BE ABLE TO SCIENTIFICALLY ANALYZE AND TO BE ABLE TO SUBSTANTIATE THE INFORMATION FOR DEFINITIVE CONCLUSIONS. 6)WHEN ENOUGH INFORMATION AND EVIDENCE IS FOUND, CERTAIN HYPOTHESES ARE DEVELOPED A STATEMENT MAY BE THAT AN ACTUAL BIGFOOT EXISTS OR THAT A REASON HAS BEEN FOUND TO EXPLAIN THE PHENOMENON. 7)INVITE CONSTRUCTIVE CRITICISM, IF THE HYPOTHESES CANNOT WITHSTAND SCRUTINY, THEN THE ECIDENCE MAY BE FLAWED, AND THE NEED TO REVERT TO REEVALUATE, GATHER MORE EVIDENCE, AND DEVELOP NEW HYPOTHESES, OR THEORY. 8)REACH A CONCLUSION OR THEORY, FIND THE SOLUTION BASED ON ALL VIABLE EVIDENCE THAT HAS BEEN THOROUGHLY TESTED, CHALLENGED, AND SCRUTINIZED. 9)KEEP AN OPEN MIND TO SEEK OTHER SOLUTIONS THAT MAY HAVE LED TO OTHER CONCLUSIONS. 10)AFTER ALL CONCLUSIONS HAVE BEEN PROPERLY TESTED AND CHALLENGED, THEN RELEASE THE INFORMATION, THROUGH REPORTS, BOOKS, AND PRESS RELEASES ETC. It's always good to use a Scientific method but it would also have specific steps leading up to publishing in a peer-reviewed journal, with the ability to confirm those results. Plus the Arizona Field Research Team still hasn't landed their own show on Animal Planet yet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Tsalagi Posted July 7, 2011 Share Posted July 7, 2011 If there is a positive side to the show it is that a couple of well known videos and photos have probably been disproved by having Bobo stand in for the Bigfoot and finding that the supposed bigfoot was no larger than Bobo in height or mass. The Silverstar Peak episode, the McKenzie River Oregon video, and the one where Bigfoot grabs a candy bar from a stump come to mind. Maybe “disprove†is a bit strong a word, but the Bigfoot research community should no longer be using those as evidence for its existence. Did they ever prove exactly what was at the stump? I was only half listening to the show. I got the idea they were suggesting it was a man, but I kept thinking it would be a bear because bears really do like candy bars. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest BIG WHITE BUFFALO Posted July 7, 2011 Share Posted July 7, 2011 i love the show! what ticks me off is this,6 episodes and then a season finale? they need to have at least 10 episodes for christ's sake! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted July 7, 2011 Share Posted July 7, 2011 It's always good to use a Scientific method but it would also have specific steps leading up to publishing in a peer-reviewed journal, with the ability to confirm those results. Plus the Arizona Field Research Team still hasn't landed their own show on Animal Planet yet. I'll have to check with the others. I did not know any of them where looking for a show on Animal Planet. Good Comment, you made me laugh when i read it about a landing a show. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted July 8, 2011 Share Posted July 8, 2011 IMO If they start tossing everything that's questionable there won't be anything left to look at. If we question everything to death Bigfoot will turn out like an OJ or Casey Anthony trial. I respectfully and completely disagree.. I believe it is anyones duty who is serious about proving this debate one way or the other to ask and question as much as possible, beyond a reasonable doubt. Doing anything short of this only indicates that the "investigator" is "wanting" to believe that these things exist, as opposed to coming to a difinitive answer through proper investigation, even if in the end the answer isn't the one you were "hoping" for.. Also, I do feel that Moneymaker's propencity for arrogance shines through quite often in the episodes that I have seen.. In particular, he seems to really be annoyed when the gal on the show questions him as to why he "chased" after the "bf" after "catching" it on thermal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Forbig Posted July 8, 2011 Share Posted July 8, 2011 I respectfully and completely disagree.. I believe it is anyones duty who is serious about proving this debate one way or the other to ask and question as much as possible, beyond a reasonable doubt. Doing anything short of this only indicates that the "investigator" is "wanting" to believe that these things exist, as opposed to coming to a difinitive answer through proper investigation, even if in the end the answer isn't the one you were "hoping" for.. Also, I do feel that Moneymaker's propencity for arrogance shines through quite often in the episodes that I have seen.. In particular, he seems to really be annoyed when the gal on the show questions him as to why he "chased" after the "bf" after "catching" it on thermal. It's a bad idea because there's not one iota of proof out there so if we get rid of all the questionable evidence (all the evidence that exists today) we won't have anything left to put together. Sometimes you have to connect the dots because it's all your ever going to get. 1) OJ left a blood trail, pretty much confessed in the Blazer and had motive 2) Casey never reported her kid missing for like 30 days, duct tape = murder 3) Bigfoot has witnesses, tracks, and pictures 1) guilty 2) guilty 3) real Or we can keep questioning every detail over and over like those trials have and Bigfoot will be finished too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bipedalist Posted July 8, 2011 BFF Patron Share Posted July 8, 2011 1) OJ left a blood trail, pretty much confessed in the Blazer and had motive2) Casey never reported her kid missing for like 30 days, duct tape = murder 3) Bigfoot has witnesses, tracks, and pictures 1) guilty 2) guilty 3) real 4) BF also slips up and leaves voluminous auditory evidence of it's existence 4) take it to the bank Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted July 8, 2011 Share Posted July 8, 2011 (edited) This is post no 464....wow, lots of traffic. I havnt read 1 previous post cos i was waiting to see my first episode. I finally aquired episode 1 and ive just finished watching it. I thought it was actually ok. Cliff and Bobbo were nice guys. Whatsherface was nice too. MM was MM (they must have edited out the foul language) I dont quite trust the producers though... Could they have done the wood knocks and the (short) squatch howl in the woods? yeah, they could episode 2 coming up ...after Battle for LA Edited July 8, 2011 by megatarsal Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest dml7788 Posted July 8, 2011 Share Posted July 8, 2011 I used to have great respect for the BFRO. However, I feel that since the abysmal Finding Bigfoot series, they just can't be taken seriously. Matt Moneymaker almost immediately believes every possible evidence for Sas is Sas no matter what. It's as if he plants the evidence and therefore knows exactly what we are looking at. I.e.: a deer carcass with broken leg that appears to have been twisted off... by no other than Sas himself. Is my trust legitimately compromised or are these guys the real deal? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest CaptainMorgan Posted July 9, 2011 Share Posted July 9, 2011 (edited) Welcome to the BFF. I can't say for you one way or the other if they are the "real deal". What I can say is that we already have numerous threads about the series replete with MM comments. We have a search function where you can find these sort of topics to participate in. Cheers Edited July 9, 2011 by CaptainMorgan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted July 9, 2011 Share Posted July 9, 2011 Merged the "BFRO" Thread with the" Animal Planet Bigfoot Series 6 Episodes on American BF Sightings" Apparently there are two ways to do it. No disrespect intended. Grayjay Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts