Guest Posted October 29, 2012 Posted October 29, 2012 I wrote ....... I'll bet the folks doing the census were not "tenured" but paid on performance .. How "bout you"?????? Sorry if you took that wrong or personal... Please re-read it as " I'll bet the folks Were not paid. How bout you... ( e.g. what is your bet...) sorry for the misunderstanding. BTW what is your bet?
Guest Posted October 29, 2012 Posted October 29, 2012 My bet would be this: http://www.wcs.org/about-us/careers.aspx
Guest Posted October 29, 2012 Posted October 29, 2012 Ziggy, the fact that hunters only go 250 yards or less into the woods from a road suggests the ease in which they could be hoaxed. While attempting to demonstrate how much land we don't traverse, you just fueled the argument that most hunters are hoaxed or hoaxable. I really doubt anyone would take a chance on fooling and scaring the crap out of someone, pretending to be a giant 400lb+ , 7' tall or taller, smelly, making extemely load vocals, throwing rocks, wearing fur, Bigfoot, when that person would be holding a high powered rifle, if they were that stupid enough to try it, I doubt they would be smart enough to pull it off . I have yet to meet a smart fool. :-)
BeachFoot Posted October 29, 2012 Posted October 29, 2012 ...... . I have yet to meet a smart fool. :-) Neither have I. However, I've met wayyyy too many educated idiots.
Guest Posted October 29, 2012 Posted October 29, 2012 Hello, I am a new member to the forum. If Ketchum's paper does get published, I would like to see how she is recieved by other papers. Remember, science is a collaborative effort by multiple reserchers. As for bigfoot/gorilla discovery comparisons, keep in mind that with gorillas we're talking about animals that lived in areas that were inaccessable to Westerns. Apparently, some Carthaginians killed and skinned some "gorillas" but we don't know if they were actual gorillas. The first account of definite gorillas by Westerners was in by the 1700s by a sailor who described human-like "monsters" in Angola. By this time, Europeans knew about orangutans and all apes where called "orangutans". Hences these monsters where known as "Pongo". Finally in the 1840s gorillas were scientifically described when Thomas Savage explored Gabon and sent back bones and specimans of the beasts. This paper describes the history of gorilla discovery and taxonomy. I ask, does it parallel the search for bigfoot? http://arts.anu.edu.au/grovco/Gorilla%20Biology.pdf
Guest Posted October 29, 2012 Posted October 29, 2012 Neither have I. However, I've met wayyyy too many educated idiots. lol, I have to agree with that
Guest BFSleuth Posted October 29, 2012 Posted October 29, 2012 This paper describes the history of gorilla discovery and taxonomy. I ask, does it parallel the search for bigfoot? http://arts.anu.edu....lla Biology.pdf There are parallels. However, I think the biggest difference is that the phenomenon of hoaxing gorillas or gorilla spoor wasn't largely nonexistent, while in the world of bigfoot research hoaxing is prevalent.
Guest Posted October 29, 2012 Posted October 29, 2012 So is this paper still pending? I keep seeing people alluding to facebook and suggesting that it's doa and I'm not sure if I missed something (I'm not on facebook) or if it's just people being cynical.
Guest BFSleuth Posted October 29, 2012 Posted October 29, 2012 It's folks being cynical, the paper's still pending.
Guest Posted October 29, 2012 Posted October 29, 2012 Ziggy, you won't find me out there in a monkey suit trying to hoax an armed person.
Guest Posted October 29, 2012 Posted October 29, 2012 @BFSleuth Do you think her and sykes are going to do something jointly ?
Guest BFSleuth Posted October 29, 2012 Posted October 29, 2012 I doubt it. However, there may be peer reviewers that will work on both papers, or possibly even scientists that might work on both projects. I think Dr. Sykes paper may be more limited in scope than Dr. Ketchum's paper.
Guest Posted October 29, 2012 Posted October 29, 2012 ^They are definitly operating under different theories and conditions, from what I've read and been told.
Guest Posted October 29, 2012 Posted October 29, 2012 There are parallels. However, I think the biggest difference is that the phenomenon of hoaxing gorillas or gorilla spoor wasn't largely nonexistent, while in the world of bigfoot research hoaxing is prevalent. And the fact that the gorilla was "discovered" by an American in a foreign land while bigfoot remains undiscovered by Americans despite (figuratively speaking} roaming in their own backyards?
Cotter Posted October 29, 2012 Posted October 29, 2012 Hi Jerry - 'undiscovered' may not be the correct word. 'undocumented by science' is more accurate, or even quite possibly 'unannounced to the public' could be even more accurate.... And yes. That is the case. Allegedly.
Recommended Posts