Guest HairyGreek Posted October 14, 2011 Share Posted October 14, 2011 You can see why she wanted a low profile when an opportunist like Coleman jumps on the bandwagon how things go sideways immediately Yes, she has done an excellent job of keeping a low profile. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Alpinist Posted October 14, 2011 Share Posted October 14, 2011 What interested Igor was the braiding of horses manes going on on her property, and it did occur during one of his visits Igor states Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest HairyGreek Posted October 14, 2011 Share Posted October 14, 2011 Would it be so hard to set up a/some video recorder(s) and have a remote ready to switch on 'record' and actually catch one of these approaching the house incidents? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Incorrigible1 Posted October 14, 2011 Share Posted October 14, 2011 Evidently so, for a variety of increasingly exasperating reasons. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted October 14, 2011 Share Posted October 14, 2011 It's easy to say she should have had a trail cam up...who here is gona send her one? $$$ is also a problem for some folks...along with the tech that goes with it. Plus we don't know all the details of any proof she has supplied to date to the researchers she did work with. Jumping to conclusions based on a internet story with out fact checking seems pretty rash. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest HairyGreek Posted October 14, 2011 Share Posted October 14, 2011 (edited) Grayjay, video cameras that come with remotes are a dime a dozen now. My family is broke and we have one. Plus, not one of the researchers she has spoken to can spare one? That's a flimsy excuse in IMO. Edited to add...I never said trail cams. She claims to hand feeding. She can't set up a camera to this event and then simply hit record since they can "sense" cameras recording them? Edited October 14, 2011 by HairyGreek Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted October 14, 2011 Share Posted October 14, 2011 Here's another reason that i've seen a lot & that i personally believe is legitimate with regards to this subject which may also give some kind of indication as to why alleged Habituation areas are not providing what many feel they should.. "I want people to realize that they do exist," Pfeifer said. "They are not aggressive, they are more human-like than an ape and I'm very protective of them." BO, I cannot abide by the "They exist, but I'm protective of them so I won't show you any evidence" line. Think about it -- if you had a friend or family member who was a fugitive from the law, if you were truly protective of them (and wanted them to remain free) would you tell anyone of their existence? No, you wouldn't -- you'd keep your mouth shut. You might let him camp in the woods behind your home, you might bring him fish, fruit, and bagels to eat, but you wouldn't be telling a reporter that he lives in your back yard and that you feed him daily. I have to side with Loren on this one. Pteronarcyd Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted October 15, 2011 Share Posted October 15, 2011 Alpinist, How do you REALLY feel about Coleman...LOL Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted October 15, 2011 Share Posted October 15, 2011 My impression is she is a successful and smart woman with a pretty decent ranching operation going on though I really don't know the details of what her economic activities are. Where did this info come from? All the articles I have read state is that she and her husband bought a small 10 acre rural parcel in 2009 and moved onto it. How did that somehow turn into a ranching operation (a decent one at that)? Unless I missed some critical info somewhere, it is easy to see how people read all kinds of unwritten and unimplied things into what is written. No wonder things get so stretched out of proportion. I'm not directing this merely at you, Alpinist. I just used that comment as an example Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BobbyO Posted October 15, 2011 SSR Team Share Posted October 15, 2011 BO, I cannot abide by the "They exist, but I'm protective of them so I won't show you any evidence" line. Think about it -- if you had a friend or family member who was a fugitive from the law, if you were truly protective of them (and wanted them to remain free) would you tell anyone of their existence? No, you wouldn't -- you'd keep your mouth shut. You might let him camp in the woods behind your home, you might bring him fish, fruit, and bagels to eat, but you wouldn't be telling a reporter that he lives in your back yard and that you feed him daily. I have to side with Loren on this one. Pteronarcyd You're not wrong P, but it might give an indication as to why certain people do what they do, or don't do in this instance.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southernyahoo Posted October 15, 2011 Share Posted October 15, 2011 (edited) "All the Bigfoot contactees -- for some reason they never take photographs," Apparently the burden of good photographs is squarely on the shoulders of contactees, Lorens' brand of crypto-research doesn't involve much photography either, but it sells books anyways. Edited October 15, 2011 by southernyahoo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Primate Posted October 15, 2011 Share Posted October 15, 2011 I'm a fan of Loren Coleman . But, to be honest, his treatment of habituaters seems based on jealosy and a kind of intellectual territorialism around his own definition of Crytozoology. He wants it to be an evidence based science. It's a precarious position because as soon as something is "discovered" it moves on to a different department. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted October 15, 2011 Share Posted October 15, 2011 Science is evidence based. By definition, science is validated through direct observation, evidence, the formulation of hypothesis, and testing. You can't do that with only witness reports, which are consistently proven unreliable in a wide variety of settings (court cases being an obvious one). I don't think it is asking very much at all to request that someone provide proof (evidence) of claims such a Mrs. Pfeifer's in order to prove what she is claiming. After all, she is traveling across Russia (and perhaps other places?) and is providing interviews for articles, actions which are certainly drawing public attention to her, her property, and the alleged BF living there. It wouldn't take much for an interested person to locate her property and check out the situation for themselves, as all of the property ownership information, maps, aerial images, etc. are online for free. I don't place Sasfooty and others here necessarily in the same position in regard to showing proof since none of them are going about making their claims to the public at large, but rather have merely shared their stories and encounters here with others who are specifically interested in the same subject or who may have had similar experiences. That's not to say that I believe the more incredible claims presented without any tangible proof. I just believe they have posted their experiences here for reasons other than public attention or exposure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest HairyGreek Posted October 15, 2011 Share Posted October 15, 2011 Very well said Surveyor. I completely agree. Southern...it's kind of a cop-out to attack Coleman. He hasn't claimed to see one as far as I know, so he is well within his rights to make a statement about a lack of clear photographic proof; especially from people who claim these things living on their land and eating out of their hands! I don't think he is at all attacking the people who have surprise sightings once in their lives. He isn't a stupid man. Also, you search for Bigfoot alone. He had 40 years of frustrations regarding multiple creatures that fall under crypto-zoology. In other words, he shovels through more..err...dung as far as ridiculous "eye-witness" accounts then several researchers looking for Bigfoot will combined. One final thought...this uncanny ability to avoid cameras of any kind...if this is true... Someone please give me a scientific explanation of how it could be possible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted October 15, 2011 Share Posted October 15, 2011 Back in the older pages there was a rip roaring discussion from BigfootProof who contacted Bushnell (I think) and the company admitted the IR beam WAS in a visible spectrum. Pragmatic Theorist was in the discussion and it was pretty educational. Scientific too!! If my memory serves, it was theorized BF due to their larger eyes could possibly see the IR beam like a flashlight in the woods... Some of the older threads are just a wealth of information. (it may be in the field section?) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts