New Bigfoot Article

[GuyInIndiana]

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."

And YET, she goes public, gives interviews and tells people where these they can be found.

Either she's very naive beyond belief, stupid, or making her story up.

She was in contact with Igor Burtsev and other habituation experiencers long before this media exposure. She was given Janice Carters BF language dictionary / phrase book and had success using some of the phrases in it. She was flying under the radar for a while, but the publicity was unavoidable during the Russia trip, which it seems turned out to be a bit of a media circus and a political publicity leverage for someone over there.

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.

So you see, she hasn't just stepped forward with "claims", she has quietly and discretely been in touch with other researchers privately for a while. I was told she didn't want to be publicly known, but I guess the Russia trip changed that. You can see why she wanted a low profile when an opportunist like Coleman jumps on the bandwagon how things go sideways immediately

So again, she has all this activity, experience and presumidly knowledge, and she turns to a Russian researcher thousands of miles away instead of local, regional or national researchers and organizations right here in her "backyard".

Fishy.

Edited October 16, 2011 by GuyInIndiana

[Guest RedRatSnake]

Either she's very naive beyond belief, stupid, or making her story up.

That's 3 strikes

Tim

[Guest Alpinist]

Erickson, literally, buys up the habituation sites and scores the dna and the footage, but Coleman is the equivalent of a carnival sideshow huckster, without the iceman. What exactly does Coleman bring to the table, in terms of sourcing evidence himself from the field ?

Coleman = Nothing

I've met him in person and he is exactly the same condescending asshat he makes himself out to be online as he is in real life.

Colemans opinion bears no weight and is of no value. Period.

He deserves to be slammed, because he never hesitates to slam others.

Edited October 16, 2011 by Alpinist

[southernyahoo]

Since there is no large mammalian species that is known to have such a covering, nor any species that can understand that cameras are our eyes or any species that could communicate such a thought, would you agree that your explanations are much less likely than Bigfoot just not being a flesh and blood animal?

Check out this thermal pic of a dog, most of it's coat is well below body temp, hair can be ambient air temperature.

http://coolcosmos.ipac.caltech.edu/image_galleries/ir_zoo/dog.html

If bigfoot is essentially a wild human I wouldn't put down communications of simple concepts as an impossibility. Humans didn't invent verbal communication yesterday parn.

[Guest]

Erickson, literally, buys up the habituation sites and scores the dna and the footage, but Coleman is the equivalent of a carnival sideshow huckster, without the iceman. What exactly does Coleman bring to the table, in terms of sourcing evidence himself from the field ?

Coleman = Nothing

I've met him in person and he is exactly the same condescending asshat he makes himself out to be online as he is in real life.

Colemans opinion bears no weight and is of no value. Period.

He deserves to be slammed, because he never hesitates to slam others.

Totally agree

over the last year, he has been slamming everyone,and what does he bring to the table,nothing but swears the earth would stop turning with out him.

He is the don King of the bf community

[Guest 127]

I responded in bold to your question in regard to what I am stating about the number of BF sightings.

In regard to the poll you referenced on alien abduction, I bolded key words and phrases in it that put it in perspective in relation to the discussion between Zigoapex and me. I did not merely leave it out, I disqualified it because it does not assert his statement that "there are a greater number of abductee cases than bf sightings(sic)." Rather, it estimates that a larger number of people might have experienced that phenomena because in that poll that % of people answered in such a way that the authors interpreted their answers as alien abduction experiences. It does not represent an actual number of reported experiences like the BF sighting number I gave does, and like the 1,700 reported alien abductions figure does.

You cannot take poll results for alleged alien abductions and put those side by side with actual report numbers for BF and get an accurate comparison. You have to compare apples to apples, polls to polls, actual reports to actual reports. If you poll 6,000 Americans in regard to potential BF sightings, what kind of results are you going to get, especially nowadays when it seems like every snapped branch and growl in the dark is a sasquatch? Of course you could poll in downtown Boston and probably come up with practically nothing...

I agree that the poll results include some wishful thinking upon the authors. The whole point was - I think if you total the amount of bigfoot reports up until 1996 the numbers would be very similar if not greater on alien abduction. You must admit that if you're trying to compare some statistics you need to use the same time periods due to media and communication changes. I'm sure the amount of reports for bigfoot grows each year and much more since the internet made it easy. Got any modern statistics on alien abduction? (never thought I'd discuss alien abduction! lol) I think the original use of the comparison was to state that some people will make claims of seeing or experiencing almost anything.

It doesn't mean that they are all true, or all untrue. Sometimes people really do see something. They might truly believe they saw a bigfoot no matter what anyone else has to say. The same can be said for many fantasy type creatures or for another example ghosts. This is complete speculation but the facts may back me up - ghost experiences are probably more common than bigfoot. Does this mean ghosts must exist?

Without any hard proof (different than "possible evidence") it could be said that people may be having alien abductions, and seeing mermaids just as likely as people are seeing a real bigfoot. Some of those people may really experience or see something they can't explain. Which of those things has the most witnesses over time? Which is more likely to be real?

[Incorrigible1]

Upon consideration, my kudos to Mr. Coleman. In simplifying a far too complicated manner, he's pretty darned spot on. There come times when spades need to be recognized.

Edited October 16, 2011 by Incorrigible1

[Guest]

I agree that the poll results include some wishful thinking upon the authors. The whole point was - I think if you total the amount of bigfoot reports up until 1996 the numbers would be very similar if not greater on alien abduction. You must admit that if you're trying to compare some statistics you need to use the same time periods due to media and communication changes. I'm sure the amount of reports for bigfoot grows each year and much more since the internet made it easy. Got any modern statistics on alien abduction? (never thought I'd discuss alien abduction! lol) I think the original use of the comparison was to state that some people will make claims of seeing or experiencing almost anything.

I'm with you on the alien abduction thing! I have no interest in it whatsoever and place no validity in the theory that what the people who are reporting experiencing that phenomena are actually being abducted by aliens. Maybe I am wrong and some big greys will beam me up tonight for a quick tour around the galaxy, but I doubt it. Due to a complete lack of interest, I had no statistics at all, but like most folks on this site, I knew there are thousands of BF sightings reported in the U.S. alone, and that number is increasing immensely every year. When Zigoapex stated that alien abduction cases outnumber BF sightings, I found that a bit hard to believe, and asked for sources to back up his claim. He even stated that with just a little research Loren Coleman could have found that information out, so it seemed to me it would be easy for him to provide the info. He simply suggested that I do an internet search, so I did. A quick, 10 minute search backed up what I had previously thought, although I did not immediately locate data that correlated exactly date-wise, I tried to use the same kind of data (actual reported sightings vs actual reported abductions). With that data, I think a basic comparison of frequency can be made, as in which phenomena seems to occur most often. The numbers are overwhelmingly in favor of BF sightings even though the figures used were all of the alien abduction reports on earth throughout history until 1996 vs the reported BF sightings of only one country in only 20 years.

I am currently reading a book of early newspaper accounts of BF (?) type reports that contains a couple hundred articles that were published prior to 1940.

Tirademan (Scott McClean), who posts here, has compiled a book of over 400 early newspaper accounts (http://www.mcclean.org/). Leif Erikson reported encountering large hairy creatures in America in 940 AD, and sightings appear in many logs and diaries of pioneers and explorers, in addition to Native American reports (not the legends), none of which appear in the sightings reports counts. Additionally, there are the reports from Russia, China, Vietnam, Pakistan, and all over the world. I do not know that they add up to 1,700, but there are a whole lot of them. I am referring to recorded sightings only, not potential unrecorded ones. I have no intention of trying to trace them down or add them up, I just called Zigoapex out on making the claim that he did without backing it up with sources and evidence.

It would be interesting to have an actual hard number of abduction reports vs BF sightings for say, 2000-2010, to compare. That is probably for another thread in the Campfire section, though!

[Guest]

Erickson, literally, buys up the habituation sites and scores the dna and the footage, but Coleman is the equivalent of a carnival sideshow huckster, without the iceman. What exactly does Coleman bring to the table, in terms of sourcing evidence himself from the field ?

Coleman = Nothing

I've met him in person and he is exactly the same condescending asshat he makes himself out to be online as he is in real life.

Colemans opinion bears no weight and is of no value. Period.

He deserves to be slammed, because he never hesitates to slam others.

Erikson scores the dna and footage. Please show me where Erikson as scored more DNA and footage than Coleman. I have shown as much DNA and Video footage as Erickson. "0"

[Guest]

Erikson scores the dna and footage. Please show me where Erikson as scored more DNA and footage than Coleman. I have shown as much DNA and Video footage as Erickson. "0"

Scored = obtained, not shown. However, you are right in that it is a bit speculative, since we are going off second and third hand info as nothing has actually been released or shown. Maybe he has it, or maybe it is in a deep freezer in Georgia...

[Guest]

According to Stuart Appelle in The Abduction Experience: A Critical Evaluation of Theory and Evidence, 1996, there had been approximately 1700 reported alien abductions worldwide in history, though some other people studying the phenomena suggested that a much greater percentage of the population may have had similar experiences but had just not reported them. Of course that cannot be verified, and as such cannot be counted.

According to the website Ourbigfoot.com, there were over 2,944 reported bigfoot sightings in the United States alone from 1987 to 2007. As with the figures above, there are most likely unreported encounters which, of course, cannot be counted. Unlike the alien abduction figures, there are thousands of additional encounters that can be counted and that have been reported and are on file from Canada, Russia, Southeast Asia, Australia, and all over the world, in addition to the reports prior to 1987 in the U.S.

Basically the figure of 1700 alien abductions represented all of the reported abductions all over the world in all of history up to 1996. The 2944 bigfoot sightings only represented 20 years worth of bigfoot sightings in one single country, so it seems to me that there are far more bigfoot sightings than there are claims of alien abductions, unless there has been an incredible mass abduction over the past 14 years.

Your picking one study that is in your favor,there are many researchers that studied much higher numbers.

below is a couple i found in a couple minutes.

and abuction experiance is much different than sightings in witch can easily be misidentified and if you look on other bifoot sites

there is less sighting listed. also many of those are noises,prints,etc... not sightings.

I'm not confirming or denying the reports on either side,just stating that there is in general more people saying there being abducted

than seeing bigfoot.

And I was saying this as to reflecting on LC statements that he has a lot of nerve calling people that were abducted were basically

wrong but to believe in an animal that was not proven is ok.I believe LC is being a hypocrite when there is just as much proof in both

subjects.

This is all i'm going to say about this,because at the end of the day were both going to believe what we perceive to be fact.(were beating a dead horse)

http://www.ufoabduction.com/faq1.htm#q3

How many people are abductees?

Abduction researchers have been personally contacted by thousands of people who have had experiences that abductees have had before they knew they were involved with the phenomenon. Polls have indicated that there may be hundreds of thousands more. By all measures, the phenomenon seems to be widespread throughout the society. Only a small number of these people have been investigated by researchers.

http://www.abduct.com

Some researchers claim up to 5 percent of the world's population has been abducted. But that number is probably over-inflated, especially when considering how many millions of people that would be. We tend to think of it as a lot less than one percent of the world's population.

Edited October 16, 2011 by zigoapex

[Guest]

Zigoapex, I didn't pick & choose a source to fit what I wanted, I posted the only one I found with an actual number of reports, rather than one that just said "thousands" or a poll that said they "estimate 5% of the population". Those kids of figures are vague and not reliable. The figures for BF sightings are actual sightings and not "bumps in the night". I see what you are getting at about Coleman now, though. You are right about the hypocrisy there. He is trying to sell books on BF, so he is lumping everything that doesn't fit with what he writes in with the alien abduction crowd, which he apparently thinks is kooky. I personally don't believe that alien abduction is the actual cause of what people are experiencing (JMO), but I am not writing anyone off as crazy (they are experiencing something), and I absolutely respect what you believe. I'm posting on a BF forum for goodness sakes, lol. My neighbors and family would probably think I'm nuts! Regardless, I realize that I may absolutely be wrong about alien abduction, about the number of cases of it that have been reported, and about the number of BF sightings.

Respectfully,

Shawn

[Guest spurfoot]

I met Pfeiffer a few years ago at the Salt Fork BF meeting. She seemed like a normal person to me. Her husband was normal too. I believe her.

[Guest]

I met Pfeiffer a few years ago at the Salt Fork BF meeting. She seemed like a normal person to me. Her husband was normal too. I believe her.

They've only had the property for two years. Were they into BF prior to moving there?

[Guest spurfoot]

I just now looked at the souvenir poster and it was the May 1-3 2009 Salt Fork meeting that I met the Pfeiffers and also Daigle of the Michigan BF group who introduced me to them. I presume they had just encountered BF at home and showed up at the conference to learn more about them.