7.62 Posted March 5, 2020 Share Posted March 5, 2020 (edited) On 3/1/2020 at 2:09 AM, Nancy Frye said: If you haven't read Scott Carpenter's book yet (Truth Denied), I highly recommend doing so. It would be nice if all scientists were honest truth seekers, but sadly this is not the case. In the bigfoot/sasquatch world, there are even more people religiously wedded to various theories and hypotheses concerning these hairy woodmen. There are many "researchers" who have blatantly attacked and attempted sabotage of other researchers, credentialed or not. Many of the worst offenders have become downright predatory, constantly on the offensive toward anybody who might have evidence that would endanger their profitable business. They are like the oncology world: why cure cancer when you can make money off of cancer patients? Many of these so-called "researchers" are making bank by "looking" for bigfoot. They don't seem to have any real interest in finding these things or delivering hard evidence. That would throw a monkey wrench into the works. At any rate, Mr. Isdahl has stated over and over that he's not interested in proving anything or finding evidence, because he feels that this has already been done, despite a concerted effort from certain quarters to suppress information and/or destroy the careers of honest truth seekers. He's championing people who have had encounters and experiences and don't know where to turn. He's starting to help people find the courage to share their traumas and thus share the burden with other like-minded individuals, and I admire the heck out of him for it. But you can do that with disparaging and ridiculing the people who do find tracks or structures and have small youtube channels . He's getting worse with the ridicule . Watch his latest video and then tell me I'm wrong. His first videos were about attacking bigfoot deniers so to speak but now his focus has shifted to attacking weekend bigfoot researchers . That's exactly what's he doing now in his latest video . Edited March 5, 2020 by 7.62 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlackRockBigfoot Posted March 5, 2020 Share Posted March 5, 2020 11 minutes ago, 7.62 said: But you can do that with disparaging and ridiculing the people who do find tracks or structures and have small youtube channels . He's getting worse with the ridicule . Watch his latest video and then tell me I'm wrong. His first videos were about attacking bigfoot deniers so to speak but now his focus has shifted to attacking weekend bigfoot researchers . That's exactly what's he doing now in his latest video . Considering that he is doing absolutely zero research and is only reading second hand accounts off this cell phone...I am not sure where he is coming from in this. I don't agree with Scott Carpenter on everything, but he is a genuinely kind man. It is strange that he seems to have teamed up with Isdahl. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
7.62 Posted March 5, 2020 Share Posted March 5, 2020 38 minutes ago, BlackRockBigfoot said: Considering that he is doing absolutely zero research and is only reading second hand accounts off this cell phone...I am not sure where he is coming from in this. I don't agree with Scott Carpenter on everything, but he is a genuinely kind man. It is strange that he seems to have teamed up with Isdahl. Every video I have watched of Scott Carpenter he presents himself well . Isdahl on the other hand loves to ridicule us. It seems to be his new thing now. I did say us and every member here that tries to find time searching for evidence between working full time , taking care of a family etc.. That latest video was all he did. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlackRockBigfoot Posted March 5, 2020 Share Posted March 5, 2020 6 minutes ago, 7.62 said: Every video I have watched of Scott Carpenter he presents himself well . Isdahl on the other hand loves to ridicule us. It seems to be his new thing now. I did say us and every member here that tries to find time searching for evidence between working full time , taking care of a family etc.. That latest video was all he did. Haven't watched it yet, but I will tonight. I am busy working that day job that apparently precludes me from being capable of serious research or looking for answers according to Isdahl. As his popularity in YouTube grows so does his list of enemies apparently. The attention is going to his head. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
norseman Posted March 5, 2020 Admin Share Posted March 5, 2020 We have two threads dedicated to a guy with a opinion. No proof and attacks nay sayers who ask for it. Dont worry about this guy or what he thinks, go do your thing! Another guy with pretty back drops is mountain beast mysteries. Cool dude! And not a lot of drama.... 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlackRockBigfoot Posted March 5, 2020 Share Posted March 5, 2020 Agreed. He's a sideshow at this point. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NatFoot Posted March 6, 2020 Share Posted March 6, 2020 And it's not like this place is hard to find. Him not showing up to correct us all speaks volumes. We have him pegged for what he is. What he is doing is apparently meeting his own goals he has set out for himself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WSA Posted March 6, 2020 Author Share Posted March 6, 2020 I do think the dude is becoming increasingly shrill, and is a real threat to jump his own shark any minute now, but....His, “I don’t need your stinkin’ proof “ is something that resonates with me. I think this is what draws the ire of most researchers who think that he should be on the proof of existence team full-time, and he refuses to cooperate. OTOH, I think he misunderstands the goals of a lot of those researchers when he dismisses them for filming “piles of sticks”. Some of these people are way past needing proof too and are only interested in documenting behavior to better understand the species. I get that he is not curious about that. You know how I know? Because he tells you that over, and over, and over ..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ioyza Posted March 6, 2020 Share Posted March 6, 2020 2 hours ago, WSA said: I do think the dude is becoming increasingly shrill, and is a real threat to jump his own shark any minute now, but....His, “I don’t need your stinkin’ proof “ is something that resonates with me. I think this is what draws the ire of most researchers who think that he should be on the proof of existence team full-time, and he refuses to cooperate. OTOH, I think he misunderstands the goals of a lot of those researchers when he dismisses them for filming “piles of sticks”. Some of these people are way past needing proof too and are only interested in documenting behavior to better understand the species. I get that he is not curious about that. You know how I know? Because he tells you that over, and over, and over ..... Absolutely, and this is why I don't identify as a "researcher" per se, because I'm not in it for proof so much as understanding and experience, but this is exactly what has increasingly irked me with Steve as he's doubled down on this avenue further and further with each video. He sticks up for witnesses and derides researchers, failing to realize that researchers are witnesses. When you consider that fact, his stance that the goal of actively seeking sasquatch in an effort to understand them is somehow pointless or wrong seems incredibly childish as he hints over and over that he knows ALL about what they REALLY are...... but he just won't tell you yet. Stay tuned! 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
norseman Posted March 6, 2020 Admin Share Posted March 6, 2020 6 hours ago, WSA said: I do think the dude is becoming increasingly shrill, and is a real threat to jump his own shark any minute now, but....His, “I don’t need your stinkin’ proof “ is something that resonates with me. I think this is what draws the ire of most researchers who think that he should be on the proof of existence team full-time, and he refuses to cooperate. OTOH, I think he misunderstands the goals of a lot of those researchers when he dismisses them for filming “piles of sticks”. Some of these people are way past needing proof too and are only interested in documenting behavior to better understand the species. I get that he is not curious about that. You know how I know? Because he tells you that over, and over, and over ..... If you CANNOT prove the thing real? How are you documenting it? If Jane Goodall and Diane Fossey disappeared into the jungle for long periods of time and claimed they were documenting an unknown ape? Without proof? They would have been committed to a white padded room.... 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WSA Posted March 6, 2020 Author Share Posted March 6, 2020 Norseman...obviously we aren't talking about a Goodall/Fossey level of study. I could answer your question with another question: Who, exactly, does the hypothetical researcher hope to prove it to anyway ? The answer to that often is: Nobody (including themselves...because they already know). This is the point. There is also the very realistic hope that once the species is confirmed, there will already be data to give the world a leg-up on behavior and habitat, etc. I don't consider that a waste of time. I think you might be hung up on the lack of confirmation to the point that you think all other inquiries or field studies are illegitimate or a waste of effort. Tell that to the folks a NAWAC, who are doing good science and not giving a rat's what science says about it, or you either I'm sure. If that stuff didn't matter they wouldn't do anything but sit in their blinds and clean their guns, but they do a whole lot more than that, even without this proof you talk about. Should you let them know you are ready to fit them all for straitjackets? 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NatFoot Posted March 6, 2020 Share Posted March 6, 2020 Documenting piles of sticks in the woods is not documenting Sasquatch behavior to learn more about them. No one knows if they make them or not. If that's your hobby and you like to think maybe you're seeing something special, that's fine too. But you aren't documenting species behavior. 1 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
norseman Posted March 6, 2020 Admin Share Posted March 6, 2020 18 minutes ago, WSA said: Norseman...obviously we aren't talking about a Goodall/Fossey level of study. I could answer your question with another question: Who, exactly, does the hypothetical researcher hope to prove it to anyway ? The answer to that often is: Nobody (including themselves...because they already know). This is the point. There is also the very realistic hope that once the species is confirmed, there will already be data to give the world a leg-up on behavior and habitat, etc. I don't consider that a waste of time. I think you might be hung up on the lack of confirmation to the point that you think all other inquiries or field studies are illegitimate or a waste of effort. Tell that to the folks a NAWAC, who are doing good science and not giving a rat's what science says about it, or you either I'm sure. If that stuff didn't matter they wouldn't do anything but sit in their blinds and clean their guns, but they do a whole lot more than that, even without this proof you talk about. Should you let them know you are ready to fit them all for straitjackets? Either the beast exists? Or it don’t.... If it exists? At some point? There will be proof. It’s a mathematical certainty. If it doesn’t? Then a lot of people need to go into padded rooms......yes. If you are a Sasquatch researcher? And you do not care about proof? Your not doing research..... your camping! The bedrock principle of western science and our entire civilization!? Is testable repeatable results. It’s given us cell phones, X-ray machines, microwaves, direct tv and about a gazillion other inventions. Being a knower isn’t enough..... you have to be a prover! I’m soooo sick of hearing this cop out. It’s just a circular argument. People ascribe things to Bigfoot all the time without a shred of evidence. Footprints, stick structures, howls, etc. How do they know that Bigfoot is responsible? We need scat, hair, saliva, blood..... or a body. Even a fossil would move the chains. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WSA Posted March 6, 2020 Author Share Posted March 6, 2020 Norseman, I'd say then , at the most, they are only wasting their time. That doesn't violate any tenet of science or rule of law that I'm aware of, so you might want to ask yourself why you care. Thing is, there are a whole lot of people out there who have drawn their own conclusions and have come to realize that waiting on Science to acknowledge something they know for a fact to be true is even a BIGGER waste of time and they've just moved on to finding out as much as they can before they die. Some day we might be grateful to these people that they felt this way. Or maybe they die in obscurity having squandered their life doing something foolish. Who knows which it will be? If I did I would be at the OTB parlor right now instead of here. I can say with some certainty though that they do it for the same reasons people do most things: They can't help themselves. That YOU think they should be operating on a higher level of scientific rigor and not putting the Sasquatch before the cart is your trip, not theirs. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WSA Posted March 6, 2020 Author Share Posted March 6, 2020 NatFoot.....You sure about that? Because the way I see it, we can't afford to declare anyone's efforts futile. For one, we have no way to be sure at this point. Two, they are going to be doing it whether we think it is useful or not. Might as well not rule out the possibility that they might come up with something worthwhile. Finally, I'd say that anything with thumbs and the brain to operate them is capable of manipulating anything in the environment within its reach. This seems to be something nobody can reasonably dispute. You saying you have certainty as to what a BF would, and would not care to do with its time strikes me as pretty bold. Do tell..what is the basis of that opinion? 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts