Why is Bigfoot still a joke to so many people?

[Nipissing]

I have a British friend who is open to most Fortean subjects, loves the idea of ghosts etc. (and says she has seen some herself). Then she absolutely howls at the idea of BF being real, and "it's all guys in suits". I don't know if she can really conceive of the wilderness over here, and how vast and untapped much of it is; I grew up on the edge of a boreal forest that is larger than western Europe. I think she simply can't conceive of the environment, or how that kind of isolation is possible, because it's so far from what she knows.

 

I think pop culture doesn't help. In the sixties and seventies there was a surge of interest in "weird" subjects: astrology, meditation, UFOs, reincarnation, and so on, and Bigfoot kind of got swept up in that, so it's always seemed a little bit "out there". A lot of those counterculture interests became very mainstream but in the absence of another blockbuster like the PGF, it was easy to sweep the whole Biggie subject into the kookoo bin and dismiss it. I think the [Not] Finding Bigfoot show didn't help. Full disclosure, I have only ever seen a couple of episodes, but quickly grew tired of the reality-show editing and all the other cliches, like the gang going "Sshh! Hear that?!" while the producers add big booming drum music to add drama (and drown out whatever they thought they heard). Hard pass. It wasn't the handling the subject needed or deserved.

 

Finally, I think the elephant in the room is the paranormal/high strangeness angle. Even as a kid in the, let's call it a distant decade, I remember reading a BF book that my dad or someone had lying around and even then, they were mentioning UFO sightings in BF hotspots and linking the two. We are all familiar with the paranormal vs biological paradigms so I won't plant any flags, but I will point out that the paranormal or spiritual angle has been there for a long time, and we don't see that too often with other cryptids. Maybe it's because the critter is so humanlike, that some want to give it spiritual or extradimensional attributes, I don't know. I can't imagine anyone claiming a psychic link with Ogopogo, can you?

 

Edited to add: for myself, I have always seen the creature as a real, biological entity that eats and poops and walks around, and which has been known to native people for hundreds of years. No more, no less. However, I'm also fascinated by how the phenomenon of Bigfoot is a big enough tent to seat everyone: biologists, pro- and anti-kill, those who believe in it as a psychic or transdimensional being, etc.

Edited July 29, 2019 by Nipissing

[Twist]

On 7/27/2019 at 11:05 PM, Huntster said:

 

I know for a fact that my wife is afraid of the remote possibility of a bigfoot encounter, and I'm pretty sure my daughters are, too. And a man discouraged me from telling bigfoot stories to his kids (even though that's exactly what they repeatedly asked me for) because he didn't want them to be afraid in the woods. I've also read multiple admissions from grown, armed men on outdoor hunting forums that a bigfoot encounter would scare them

 

I should have explained my position better.  I know there are people out there afraid of BF.  My contention is, that when dealing with the general public, the lack of belief is not fear based.   The average soccer mom or soccer dad walking thru the store is not refusing to accept the animal due to fear of it, it’s most likely due to a lack of information/proof and the stigma behind the creature.   

[wiiawiwb]

On 7/27/2019 at 10:45 PM, Incorrigible1 said:

The OP's first sentence says it all. One word, actually. "Believe."

 

Until concrete evidence is submitted, it will be thus.

 

I would submit there is plenty of evidence. What we don't have is proof.

[Huntster]

1 hour ago, Twist said:

..........My contention is, that when dealing with the general public, the lack of belief is not fear based.   The average soccer mom or soccer dad walking thru the store is not refusing to accept the animal due to fear of it, it’s most likely due to a lack of information/proof and the stigma behind the creature.   

 

I also need to focus on my words in order to better communicate (many call this "semantics", but careful communication is important to achieve better understanding).

 

By identifying the "average soccer mom ot soccer dad", you are correctly implying that you're talking about a segment of society.......and maybe the majority. You are also discussing "doubt" and "disbelief" ("lack of belief") and "denial" ("refusing to accept"), which pretty much complete the degrees of unacceptance. 

 

I will concede that most unacceptance is likely based upon both a lack of information or lack of proof as well as disinformation and misinformation (radical skepticism and hoaxes). But as many individuals begin to reflect on the possibility that sasquatches might actually exist, fear takes hold and helps fight off acceptance. Anatomist D. W. Grieve of the Royal Free Hospital School of Medicine studied a copy of the film in 1971. He wrote that his "his "subjective impressions have oscillated between total acceptance of the Sasquatch based on the grounds that the film would be difficult to fake, to one of irrational rejection based on an emotional response to the possibility that the Sasquatch actually exists. This seems worth stating because others have reacted similarly to the film........."

 

 

 

4 minutes ago, wiiawiwb said:

I would submit there is plenty of evidence. What we don't have is proof.

 

<Adjective> evidence ("concrete", "convincing", "conclusive", "compelling", "immutable", "gotta' rub their noses in it", etc) essentially equals "proof".

 

 

[MIB]

On 7/28/2019 at 3:40 AM, VAfooter said:

Interesting tale MIB. Did the logger have an encounter or did he just know of other credible accounts (from friends or people that he trusted) that terrified him?

 

He didn't say.   I didn't ask.   When things started getting heated, my focus went to exiting without anyone getting their head beaten in, not debating an irrational and angry person.

 

MIB 

Edited July 29, 2019 by MIB

[Madison5716]

I think the topic of bigfoot is still a joke because 1) there's hoaxers who ruin it for everyone, 2) people are afraid that they could actually be a real species of near-human and don't want it to be true, 3) they don't know how much evidence there actually is, and 4) the powers that be want it to stay in the realm of fiction for a hundred reasons (some good, some not).

 

 

"I’ve never been a believer in the idea of people being afraid of BF"

 

What?! I'm scared spitless of bigfoot. But my curiosity is stronger  😎

Edited July 29, 2019 by Madison5716

[Twist]

With zero confirmed kills by a BF they seem either docile enough or smart enough to avoid the situations.  

[Franco]

40 minutes ago, Madison5716 said:

I think the topic of bigfoot is still a joke because 1) there's hoaxers who ruin it for everyone, 2) people are afraid that they could actually be a real species of near-human and don't want it to be true, 3) they don't know how much evidence there actually is, and 4) the powers that be want it to stay in the realm of fiction for a hundred reasons (some good, some not).

 

 

"I’ve never been a believer in the idea of people being afraid of BF"

 

What?! I'm scared spitless of bigfoot. But my curiosity is stronger  😎

I biggest issue I see, that there are just many people with the woo,woo theory's, Dimensional, able cloak themselves, always seen with UFO's... Why the general public laughs it.  Its hard for serious researchers to present hard evidence with the goofy stuff going around.

Look at the giant squid, even with bodies washing up on shores there was a hugh body of people who thought it pranksters. Until they got one on tape. 

Then there is video like this, which is pretty good

 

https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fsquatchable.com%2Fwatch.asp%3Fid%3D76272%26title%3DSkunk%2BApe%2BFilm%2B%2D%2BSPRINTERS%2BSPEED%26utm_source%3Dsquatchable%26utm_medium%3Demail&amp;data=01|01|vincent.franco%40careerbuilder.com|0a48ba402a0c436664fd08d71452857d|7cc1677566a34e8b80fd5b1f1db15061|0&amp;sdata=hrxUhhMBAd2oeihQ0Ksb5pwItKK0VmTaU9C%2FxWSYJHk%3D&amp;reserved=0

[Arvedis]

1 hour ago, Twist said:

With zero confirmed kills by a BF they seem either docile enough or smart enough to avoid the situations.  

 

They have shown intelligence but anything that can rip apart an elk with its bare hands is not docile 👽

47 minutes ago, Franco said:

 Its hard for serious researchers to present hard evidence with the goofy stuff going around.

 

Who can be considered a serious BF researcher in your view?

[Huntster]

2 hours ago, Twist said:

With zero confirmed kills by a BF they seem either docile enough or smart enough to avoid the situations.  

 

That's like zero confirmed kills by orcas. It could be because they're "either docile enough or smart enough to avoid the situations."

 

Or it could be that there just weren't any survivors to tell what happened.......

 

(Reminds me of the time a few of us guys were frantically trying to shut down a runaway steam generator. One guy took off running. When it was over, I asked him where he was going. He said, "Somebody needed to survive the explosion so he could tell the authorities what happened there.")

2 hours ago, Franco said:

..........Look at the giant squid, even with bodies washing up on shores there was a hugh body of people who thought it pranksters. Until they got one on tape.........

 

Interesting analogy. Science had giant squid carcasses that had washed up for nearly a century, but never a live specimen, which was what they really wanted, so many continued to spread doubt. The video was just the "first time" people had actually "seen one alive", which was also a lie, since many mariners/fisherman had seen/caught them. 

 

They continue to behave as if they're the only ones who count. Until they possess one on a slab or grind its bones to make their bread, it doesn't exist. So y'all had better hurry up and deliver one to them.

[Twist]

So out of curiosity, of all the reports in various databases how many confirmed attacks do we have on humans?  I’m not talking intimidation methods or rock throwing.   Actual attacks by a BF intended to do great bodily harm or kill a human?    

 

 

What large predator has a 100%  successful kill rate against men?  And to add another layer, leaving no witnesses or evidence of said kill aside from 411 type speculation? 

[7.62]

10 minutes ago, Twist said:

So out of curiosity, of all the reports in various databases how many confirmed attacks do we have on humans?  I’m not talking intimidation methods or rock throwing.   Actual attacks by a BF intended to do great bodily harm or kill a human?    

 

 

What large predator has a 100%  successful kill rate against men?  And to add another layer, leaving no witnesses or evidence of said kill aside from 411 type speculation? 

There's no confirmed anything  of BF  

[Twist]

How many reports of attacks on humans that have done bodily harm?

[7.62]

None I know of 

Never  read a report more than just being chased away  or a couple where large rocks were being thrown at a RV that damaged the roof and side walls .

From everything I have read if true Ape canyon would rate the most vicious attack .

[Twist]

I’d agree that’s why I tend to believe that that BF are docile or intelligent enough to avoid harming humans.   It’s obvious that they are capable and I have no doubt they will intimidate when needed.   

 

Hunter mentioned Orcas above, I chalk them up to docile while also intelligent.