The other side of the coin

[wiiawiwb]

13 hours ago, Grandcherokee said:

For the whites. Maybe sighting the creature was little more than false

identification of more obvious woodland creatures. 

Or, I could be wrong!;)

 

The misidentification is likely to happen when a slender-fingered, Columbia law student toddles out of Manhattan for the first time and sets foot in the woods. He/she wouldn't know a racoon from a bear, a fox from a wolf, nor a bobcat from mountain lion.

 

There have been numerous reports from people intimately familiar with the woods, such as hunters, biologists, rangers, and backpackers, who would easily identify a bear from a sasquatch. As I've said in a prior thread, there is zero chance I'd make that misidentification.

[Grandcherokee]

Well it is wonderful that you are so confident ! But to counter your point. I have met many hunters and outdoors men who have seen things that they were not sure about! Including some researchers who have been in the field researching for quite some time.

[MIB]

55 minutes ago, Grandcherokee said:

Well it is wonderful that you are so confident ! But to counter your point. I have met many hunters and outdoors men who have seen things that they were not sure about! Including some researchers who have been in the field researching for quite some time.

 

There is a difference between seeing something you're not sure about and seeing something you are sure about and wrong.   If I say I saw something, I saw that thing.   If I'm not sure what I saw, I simply say so. 

 

MIB

[wiiawiwb]

Someone who is familiar with the woods, and those creatures that inhabit it, particularly a hunter, will reserve judgment of what they've just seen until it can be identified. If a patch of dark-brown, or black, hair goes moving through the brush, or trees, there is no way to be able to identify it. It is simply unknown until it can be clearly seen. A responsible person would admit that.

 

With that said, if you could see something upright and walking in the woods, there is no way a bear could be confused with a sasquatch, like Patty, that takes a 41" stride. Bears have tiny, little legs from the knee down. Moreover, their stride is small and choppy.  Patty's walk is smooth and gliding.

 

As you admit to above, those "hunters and outdoors men" were not sure what they saw. That is being responsible. They have not misidentified. They have simply not identified. The difference is profound.

[Grandcherokee]

26 minutes ago, wiiawiwb said:

Someone who is familiar with the woods, and those creatures that inhabit it, particularly a hunter, will reserve judgment of what they've just seen until it can be identified. If a patch of dark-brown, or black, hair goes moving through the brush, or trees, there is no way to be able to identify it. It is simply unknown until it can be clearly seen. A responsible person would admit that.

 

With that said, if you could see something upright and walking in the woods, there is no way a bear could be confused with a sasquatch, like Patty, that takes a 41" stride. Bears have tiny, little legs from the knee down. Moreover, their stride is small and choppy.  Patty's walk is smooth and gliding.

 

As you admit to above, those "hunters and outdoors men" were not sure what they saw. That is being responsible. They have not misidentified. They have simply not identified. The difference is profound.

Unless you are an observer who is not being responsible!

[7.62]

47 minutes ago, wiiawiwb said:

Someone who is familiar with the woods, and those creatures that inhabit it, particularly a hunter, will reserve judgment of what they've just seen until it can be identified. If a patch of dark-brown, or black, hair goes moving through the brush, or trees, there is no way to be able to identify it. It is simply unknown until it can be clearly seen. A responsible person would admit that.

 

With that said, if you could see something upright and walking in the woods, there is no way a bear could be confused with a sasquatch, like Patty, that takes a 41" stride. Bears have tiny, little legs from the knee down. Moreover, their stride is small and choppy.  Patty's walk is smooth and gliding.

 

As you admit to above, those "hunters and outdoors men" were not sure what they saw. That is being responsible. They have not misidentified. They have simply not identified. The difference is profound.

I actually put  more credence when a hunter or hiker says he thinks he saw a bigfoot than when  a bigfoot researcher claims they saw one .

 

I might go as far as saying I might put more credence in the Columbia law student who never went camping before.

I've watched 100's of videos of researchers if not 1000's and many not all but I'm going as far as saying most  researchers  everything is a bigfoot in the woods to them.

 

Every sound , every stick break , every splash  you name it.

 

 

 

 

 

[BlackRockBigfoot]

1 hour ago, 7.62 said:

I actually put  more credence when a hunter or hiker says he thinks he saw a bigfoot than when  a bigfoot researcher claims they saw one .

 

I might go as far as saying I might put more credence in the Columbia law student who never went camping before.

I've watched 100's of videos of researchers if not 1000's and many not all but I'm going as far as saying most  researchers  everything is a bigfoot in the woods to them.

 

Every sound , every stick break , every splash  you name it.

 

 

 

 

 

I think that he means actual researchers, not people who collect Bigfoot coffee mugs and film themselves on their phones banging t-ball bats on trees outside of a campground.  

[norseman]

Apes have shoulders. Bears do not. If your not simply observing a flash of fur in the forest. But getting a good look at the animal? Anyone experienced shouldn’t have any difficulties distinguishing the two different species.

[BlackRockBigfoot]

10 minutes ago, norseman said:

Apes have shoulders. Bears do not. If your not simply observing a flash of fur in the forest. But getting a good look at the animal? Anyone experienced shouldn’t have any difficulties distinguishing the two different species.

This.  
 

This is a world of difference between saying “I saw something large and dark moving through the brush “  and giving a detailed account of how its face looked, its build, how it moved, etc.  

 

As far as those people who see Sasquatch behind every tree…it’s simple Bigfoot economics.  The supply of real evidence and sightings does not meet the demand…therefore the supply is artificially inflated to meet that demand.

[wiiawiwb]

3 hours ago, 7.62 said:

I actually put  more credence when a hunter or hiker says he thinks he saw a bigfoot than when  a bigfoot researcher claims they saw one .

A hunter or hiker may not have any skin the game which, if true, lends credibility. It depends on the credibility researcher who has proffered the claim of a sighting. That researcher might also be an experienced hunter or hiker and might be in the woods for many weeks during the year making that person quite knowledgeable about the forest and things within it. It depends on their verascity.

Edited July 8, 2021 by wiiawiwb

[7.62]

6 hours ago, BlackRockBigfoot said:

I think that he means actual researchers, not people who collect Bigfoot coffee mugs and film themselves on their phones banging t-ball bats on trees outside of a campground.  

Agree and absolutely there is a difference between the two . Some of you guys here spend a lot of time and are knowledgeable on forest sounds and the animals that inhabit your area of research. I recently asked a member here that lives in the New England if he was sure what he saw was a bigfoot and he posted even though he only saw it from the rear he was sure it was walking up right .  He said it was moving very fast but I take him at his word that he knows the difference between a bear and seeing the creature we call bigfoot. 

[7.62]

5 hours ago, wiiawiwb said:

A hunter or hiker may not have any skin the game which, if true, lends credibility. It depends on the credibility researcher who has proffered the claim of a sighting. That researcher might also be an experienced hunter or hiker and might be in the woods for many weeks during the year making that person quite knowledgeable about the forest and things within it. It depends on their verascity.

Agree that  sometimes that's a big one when they have nothing to gain .  

[ShadowBorn]

As a hunter who loves to bow hunt. I see hunters in a different view. Especially bow hunter's since most are different in how they hunt. It all in tree's and it is more personal with the animal when you bow hunt. So when I hear a hunter come out and say that they seen some thing odd out in the woods . Well I am going to listen to their account of their event. Sure hikers will run into them but hunters are in their space and are more observable. Like the hunters that cannot find their game. But not just that.

 

These creatures that are out there will observe people who have been going to a place all the time. Places where they may be in maybe certain times of the year. Like fall and spring and some late summer.

 

The hunters that I have talked to. Have never said that they have seen a Bigfoot. But they have always said that they have seen some thing strange. Like they have seen some thing with a big butt with hair run across near their stand. The other weird thing that I have seen was an elk in my area. But the strange part was. It look like some thing was wear the elk head as it walked across these trees.  It was early fall when this event took place. What ever it was it did not look normal. I had asked other hunters in this area. They had said that they have seen strange things too. But it seems that hunters might talk amongst our selves in certain areas of public hunting land. 

[7.62]

1 hour ago, ShadowBorn said:

As a hunter who loves to bow hunt. I see hunters in a different view. Especially bow hunter's since most are different in how they hunt. It all in tree's and it is more personal with the animal when you bow hunt. So when I hear a hunter come out and say that they seen some thing odd out in the woods . Well I am going to listen to their account of their event. Sure hikers will run into them but hunters are in their space and are more observable. Like the hunters that cannot find their game. But not just that.

 

These creatures that are out there will observe people who have been going to a place all the time. Places where they may be in maybe certain times of the year. Like fall and spring and some late summer.

 

The hunters that I have talked to. Have never said that they have seen a Bigfoot. But they have always said that they have seen some thing strange. Like they have seen some thing with a big butt with hair run across near their stand. The other weird thing that I have seen was an elk in my area. But the strange part was. It look like some thing was wear the elk head as it walked across these trees.  It was early fall when this event took place. What ever it was it did not look normal. I had asked other hunters in this area. They had said that they have seen strange things too. But it seems that hunters might talk amongst our selves in certain areas of public hunting land. 

Now that's weird . You saw no body because it was obscured by trees ? Could it have been a hunter with a death wish with a recent kill packing out his mount strapped to his pack?  Something like that needs to be wrapped in safety orange .

[ShadowBorn]

@7.62

Yes. it's odd. What hunter in their right mind would be carrying their decoy on there back with out having it wrapped in hunters orange. But is not what I seen and there are no elk in this area. Have never even found tracks of elk in this area. But have found these creatures tracks. Have heard stories about them wearing animal skins on their heads before on this very forum. So this is a complicated issue about these creatures and what they do or might do. 

 

Could this have been a learned behavior by us as humans when we hunted as cave man. I have seen different positions of the way they hunt. It all makes sense as a bow hunter when you put it in practice.  Native Americans call them skins or getting their skins as it was told to me by this one Native American. Using the skin of deer as their clothing.

 

I have walked upped on a nice six pointer on this ridge. We both made eye contact and he decided to lay right in front of me. I had my bow in my right hand by my side. This buck was not ten feet away from me. The wind was in my face and he was right in front of me laying down staring at me. It felt like an hour but it was only two to three minutes. All I said to my self was that I could not believe what was taking place at that moment. You are just trying to take it all in at that moment. But at the same time you are trying to figure out why this is taking place.

 

These creatures are about the same thing. Except you are now trying to except what your mind cannot. When they come around it is for some reason why. Who knows why they will show them selves to some. Other they will not. They are beings that have a mind of their own. What they see in some of us is in them to know.  But they do have some curiosity towards us. That so called elk that I saw. Well it was not an elk.  It was enough to get me down from my stand and get out of there and go the opposite way out of the woods.