Huntster Posted January 18, 2020 Share Posted January 18, 2020 5 minutes ago, Foxhill said: ...........if friendly relations are established with the Bigfoot nation, I certainly could be convinced by a meet and greet just let me know when and where. Yeah, sure. Mr. Scientist wants his carcass delivered, and Mr. Diplomat wants his pow wow invitation delivered. Wait for it right here, Mr. Ambassador........................................................ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Foxhill Posted January 18, 2020 BFF Patron Share Posted January 18, 2020 1 minute ago, Huntster said: Yeah, sure. Mr. Scientist wants his carcass delivered, and Mr. Diplomat wants his pow wow invitation delivered. Wait for it right here, Mr. Ambassador........................................................ You got it! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
georgerm Posted January 19, 2020 Author Share Posted January 19, 2020 (edited) On 1/17/2020 at 1:35 PM, Foxhill said: No need to apologize, blunts ok! I don't think you've said anything you would not say to me face to face and the same goes for me. We might have a spirited discussion and it may even include a few bad words but I think we'd do it with a smile on our faces and could agree to disagree then go look for Bigfoot. A lot gets lost when discussing stuff on the internet LOL. Science is driven by where the evidence takes it in regards to any new discovery, its not phobic about Bigfoot or any new discovery. It's just that they have reached the same conclusion most people have. There's nothing to indicate further study. Just as with the OP and your point, how do you explain a near continent wide destruction/exploitation of flora and fauna over 300yrs and an 8' tall ninja has avoid providing even one shred of scientifically verifiable evidence? Yet eyewitness reports indicate its increasing population continent wide to this day, there my be a scientific study of the Bigfoot phenomenon, some day but I doubt it will involve a biologist. I would suggest that the majority of discoveries of new creatures above 1lb where made by people just like you and me, because they were either eating them or being eaten by them. Then the scientist came along and "discovered" them. Unfortunately the only evidence that will survive any scientific scrutiny has not been produced, the only thing we've got is, stories, some obvious fake footprint cast and a cowboys Bigfoot movie at this point. Foxhill, you come on the forum and now have almost 50 posts and again, you derailed the thread. If you want to discuss 'bigfoot does not exist' then please start a new thread. Derailing this thread shows really poor table manners. We are not not discussing if bigfoot exists or not. Before I knew anything about bigfoot, I was lucky and saw one watching up sleep out in the woods around 1980. Most of us have studied the evidence and are reasonably assured that bigfoot exists. We have spoken with knowers and some here are knowers. We are discussing what traits or kind of thinking that enables bigfoot to evade capture, shooting, or getting hours of quality fillm. This is the basis of the thread. Once we know why and how bigfoot evades us we can prove to the Department of Interior that the creature exists. Once the federal government states bigfoot is real, then hunting and bothering bigfoot will probably be a felony and jail time. This statement is another thread. Let's focus on the underlined thread. Edited January 19, 2020 by georgerm improve 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vinchyfoot Posted January 19, 2020 Share Posted January 19, 2020 4 minutes ago, georgerm said: Foxhill, you come on the forum and now have almost 50 posts and again, you derailed the thread. If you want to discuss bigfoot does not exist then please start a new thread. Derailing this thread shows really poor table manners. We are not not discussing if bigfoot exists or not. Most of us have studied the evidence and are reasonably assured that bigfoot exists. We have spoken with knowers and some here are knowers. We are discussing what traits bigfoot has that enables it to evade researchers that want hours of video or hunters that want to shoot one. This is the basis of the thread. Once we know why and how bigfoot evades us we can prove to the Department of Interior that the creature exists. Once the federal government states bigfoot is real, then hunting and bothering bigfoot will be a felony and jail time. This statement is another thread. Let's focus on the underlined thread. Also, if you're so convinced it doesn't exist why be on a forum about the subject. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
georgerm Posted January 19, 2020 Author Share Posted January 19, 2020 5 minutes ago, vinchyfoot said: Also, if you're so convinced it doesn't exist why be on a forum about the subject. If you don't believe BF exists then start your own thread and discuss why you believe bigfoot doesn't exist. Examine real plaster casts and look for dermal ridges, midtarsal breaks, scars, ridge patterns and other features. If the bigfoot cast looks fake then prove it. Next go to DNA and eDNA and explain why biggie's DNA samples appear to be contaminated with human DNA. Tear down the evidence for bigfoot on another thread. Maybe you can prove to some that biggie doesn't exist if that's your stance. Is this your stance? We are discussing what traits bigfoot has that enables it to evade researchers that want hours of video or hunters that want to shoot one. This is the basis of the thread. 17 minutes ago, vinchyfoot said: Also, if you're so convinced it doesn't exist why be on a forum about the subject. Did I say BF does not exist? What's you opinion of bigfoot? Why are we not getting good clear video of bigfoot? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DugasCajun Posted January 19, 2020 Share Posted January 19, 2020 As a non spokesman for the DOI ,USGS, and having worked for this agency for 20+ years. I can honestly say, it's all about funding. We would study algae in Antarctica if the funding was there. To give an example. When the Ivory BIlled Woodpecker(IBWO) was supposedly rediscovered......the funding coming from FWS was on the scale of the budget of most countries. Why? Because the IBWO was the poster child of Ecology and within the Ornithologists circles due to the debate of old growth forests versus the first inhabitants and arrival of Europeans as far as practice of forestry. Old growth versus slash and burn versus slowly culling forests and moving on, to allow the IBWO to thrive on slowing dying trees (grubs to eat). To give an example of amount of funding involved for just one aspect of the funding we received. We purchased 1950's aerial imagery in stereo at approx 1:18k scale for all of Tensas parish, Louisiana (641 square miles ) at around 40$ per frame for me, just me to map the whole parish for potential IBWO habitat (second growth versus newer harvests, and basic habitat mapping). Then scan and rectify this imagery. Crazy $$$ We even sent teams to the parish courthouse in Tensas to look up property records dating back to the civil war ( fyi, all parish courthouses in Louisiana have period data on property records and lay of the land b/c generals would send teams to every court house). Here is the kicker of it all. I gave a presentation in front of a group of Cornell scientists (very nervous) and at the end some guy in the audience invited anyone to come see his footage of a supposed IBWO....he set up shop in our office ( just because of the room available) and NOT ONE... NOT ONE person showed up to see his footage, only us who work in that office. It was blobpecker to be sure, but with all that money on the line, you would think any proof at all would be worth a look, but not one. Scientists are a hard nut to crack. To scientists within DOI, it will take more than a body on a slab, it will take a real to life Ecological concern, across a lot of disciplines to move the needle. I am a believer, but I am small potatoes within DOI. I just do habitat mapping. Give one final example. A lady in the next building who is head of the FWS here sent out a Request for Funding. To study potential bigfoot habitat in Big Thicket NP, Texas, and it didn't go well. And our office was perfectally set up to do this work and my supervisors just laughed at it.......It was funding.....FUNDING, food on the table and they still turned it down. Sorry can't find the link. In summary, it will take a lot of approaches from multiple disciplines to stir interest within DOI. We are all about guaranteed funding, we shake at questionable research and funding. *****We operate on reimbursable funds, which mean we rely on other agencies for funds, we don't just get money from the treasury, we have to go out and sell our research, it has to be on sound footing to sell and to receive multiple years of funding. And BIAS.........put a IBWO on a slab and we could fund the Army for a year. Sad 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
norseman Posted January 19, 2020 Share Posted January 19, 2020 1 hour ago, georgerm said: If you don't believe BF exists then start your own thread and discuss why you believe bigfoot doesn't exist. Examine real plaster casts and look for dermal ridges, midtarsal breaks, scars, ridge patterns and other features. If the bigfoot cast looks fake then prove it. Next go to DNA and eDNA and explain why biggie's DNA samples appear to be contaminated with human DNA. Tear down the evidence for bigfoot on another thread. Maybe you can prove to some that biggie doesn't exist if that's your stance. Is this your stance? We are discussing what traits bigfoot has that enables it to evade researchers that want hours of video or hunters that want to shoot one. This is the basis of the thread. Did I say BF does not exist? What's you opinion of bigfoot? Why are we not getting good clear video of bigfoot? He is agreeing with you.... he is addressing Foxhill. 4 minutes ago, DugasCajun said: As a non spokesman for the DOI ,USGS, and having worked for this agency for 20+ years. I can honestly say, it's all about funding. We would study algae in Antarctica if the funding was there. To give an example. When the Ivory BIlled Woodpecker(IBWO) was supposedly rediscovered......the funding coming from FWS was on the scale of the budget of most countries. Why? Because the IBWO was the poster child of Ecology and within the Ornithologists circles due to the debate of old growth forests versus the first inhabitants and arrival of Europeans as far as practice of forestry. Old growth versus slash and burn versus slowly culling forests and moving on, to allow the IBWO to thrive on slowing dying trees (grubs to eat). To give an example of amount of funding involved for just one aspect of the funding we received. We purchased 1950's aerial imagery in stereo at approx 1:18k scale for all of Tensas parish, Louisiana (641 square miles ) at around 40$ per frame for me, just me to map the whole parish for potential IBWO habitat (second growth versus newer harvests, and basic habitat mapping). Then scan and rectify this imagery. Crazy $$$ We even sent teams to the parish courthouse in Tensas to look up property records dating back to the civil war ( fyi, all parish courthouses in Louisiana have period data on property records and lay of the land b/c generals would send teams to every court house). Here is the kicker of it all. I gave a presentation in front of a group of Cornell scientists (very nervous) and at the end some guy in the audience invited anyone to come see his footage of a supposed IBWO....he set up shop in our office ( just because of the room available) and NOT ONE... NOT ONE person showed up to see his footage, only us who work in that office. It was blobpecker to be sure, but with all that money on the line, you would think any proof at all would be worth a look, but not one. Scientists are a hard nut to crack. To scientists within DOI, it will take more than a body on a slab, it will take a real to life Ecological concern, across a lot of disciplines to move the needle. I am a believer, but I am small potatoes within DOI. I just do habitat mapping. Give one final example. A lady in the next building who is head of the FWS here sent out a Request for Funding. To study potential bigfoot habitat in Big Thicket NP, Texas, and it didn't go well. And our office was perfectally set up to do this work and my supervisors just laughed at it.......It was funding.....FUNDING, food on the table and they still turned it down. Sorry can't find the link. In summary, it will take a lot of approaches from multiple disciplines to stir interest within DOI. We are all about guaranteed funding, we shake at questionable research and funding. *****We operate on reimbursable funds, which mean we rely on other agencies for funds, we don't just get money from the treasury, we have to go out and sell our research, it has to be on sound footing to sell and to receive multiple years of funding. And BIAS.........put a IBWO on a slab and we could fund the Army for a year. Sad More than a body on a slab!? Explain? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DugasCajun Posted January 19, 2020 Share Posted January 19, 2020 More than a body on a slab? Because, within our agency you have to address multiple ecological issues or tie it in with our basic core missions (climate change, water, land use, a few more out of my arena) To present a project to let's say the Corps of Engineers (who are our primary funding agency) we would have to make a case for conservation, habitat creation, habitat monitoring and tie that in with some case of climate change, loss of Mangrove along our coast over the years as an example. Now FWS is a bit more forgiving, they would be interested in their land, but again just having some animal on their land wouldn't move many needles. For instance I would have to pitch the case for habitat use, land use, monitoring, and as a kicker, throw in a endangered bird to even get a hint at funding. Throw in overhead, at 27% for FWS, 51% for COE, we are looking at least 400k (COE) to fund me and 2 contractors for 4 years. The amount of time to establish any trend, be it in the past or moving forward. Look I am a believer, I am just giving an angle of how our agency works. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
norseman Posted January 19, 2020 Share Posted January 19, 2020 2 minutes ago, DugasCajun said: More than a body on a slab? Because, within our agency you have to address multiple ecological issues or tie it in with our basic core missions (climate change, water, land use, a few more out of my arena) To present a project to let's say the Corps of Engineers (who are our primary funding agency) we would have to make a case for conservation, habitat creation, habitat monitoring and tie that in with some case of climate change, loss of Mangrove along our coast over the years as an example. Now FWS is a bit more forgiving, they would be interested in their land, but again just having some animal on their land wouldn't move many needles. For instance I would have to pitch the case for habitat use, land use, monitoring, and as a kicker, throw in a endangered bird to even get a hint at funding. Throw in overhead, at 27% for FWS, 51% for COE, we are looking at least 400k (COE) to fund me and 2 contractors for 4 years. The amount of time to establish any trend, be it in the past or moving forward. Look I am a believer, I am just giving an angle of how our agency works. Im not questioning your beliefs. I just find it incredulous that if proof was offered up? They wouldn’t even look at it or fund a study... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DugasCajun Posted January 19, 2020 Share Posted January 19, 2020 1 minute ago, norseman said: Im not questioning your beliefs. I just find it incredulous that if proof was offered up? They wouldn’t even look at it or fund a study... I hear ya, I shake my head sometimes at how hard headed our head scientists are.. They go after the guaranteed money, why? publishing, it is all about publishing. Their very existence is publishing. We don't have tenor so no one can ever just do research like this. Ok, let me imagine a perfect scene. Bigfoot was confirmed to have come from an ecological sensitive area after some sort of natural disaster, flood, oil spill, hurricane..ect. $$$$$$$$$$ Bigfoot discovered on private land with no ecological concern, crickets. I am a geographer, not part of the scientific always need to publish side, so don't rely on publishing to survive, just habitat map, but I can tell you, the hottest thing going on on their side is modeling. Greek to me, but publishes like hotcakes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Huntster Posted January 20, 2020 Share Posted January 20, 2020 46 minutes ago, norseman said: Im not questioning your beliefs. I just find it incredulous that if proof was offered up? They wouldn’t even look at it or fund a study... Look at the Homo floresiensis find. Right off the bat came several years of argument over whether ir not the skeletons were diseased. When that was over, and despite the obvious link to Ebu gogo and/or Orang Pendek, no flood of funding, research, or interest followed. In fact, the usual dismissal of "cultural memory" is how these cryptics were immediately re-swept under the rug. Science is completely corrupted just like everything else. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
norseman Posted January 20, 2020 Share Posted January 20, 2020 1 hour ago, DugasCajun said: I hear ya, I shake my head sometimes at how hard headed our head scientists are.. They go after the guaranteed money, why? publishing, it is all about publishing. Their very existence is publishing. We don't have tenor so no one can ever just do research like this. Ok, let me imagine a perfect scene. Bigfoot was confirmed to have come from an ecological sensitive area after some sort of natural disaster, flood, oil spill, hurricane..ect. $$$$$$$$$$ Bigfoot discovered on private land with no ecological concern, crickets. I am a geographer, not part of the scientific always need to publish side, so don't rely on publishing to survive, just habitat map, but I can tell you, the hottest thing going on on their side is modeling. Greek to me, but publishes like hotcakes. I appreciate your candor! I guess I always thought physical proof was incontestable. I did not realize that it could be simply ignored. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DugasCajun Posted January 20, 2020 Share Posted January 20, 2020 Sadly it is tied to funding and other protocols. If one is discovered in a state park, the state will take control. If it even touches federal land FWS takes over unless it is a waterway and the COE takes over. I have worked for the USGS for 22 years, unless this ....and I am a believer...is found within a ecological area, no action. Why? Funding, publishing. I am willing to push this issue within the agency, but what cred do I have....sigh... All of you taking the gov route take a break, its not that easy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
norseman Posted January 20, 2020 Share Posted January 20, 2020 17 minutes ago, DugasCajun said: Sadly it is tied to funding and other protocols. If one is discovered in a state park, the state will take control. If it even touches federal land FWS takes over unless it is a waterway and the COE takes over. I have worked for the USGS for 22 years, unless this ....and I am a believer...is found within a ecological area, no action. Why? Funding, publishing. I am willing to push this issue within the agency, but what cred do I have....sigh... All of you taking the gov route take a break, its not that easy. Looking at the mountains of data each state and federal agency crunches each year? What’s yer professional opinion on this subject? Does the government know about it? And if so? Why do they cover it up? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Incorrigible1 Posted January 20, 2020 Share Posted January 20, 2020 (edited) DugasCajun, welcome to BFF! All due respect for your position and opinion, but I simply can't agree. Bigfoot corpus delicti, a corpse on a table, changes the whole equation. Edited January 20, 2020 by Incorrigible1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts