How have the "woo-woo" reports affected your opinion?

[MIB]

14 minutes ago, 7.62 said:

Has anyone actually seen one posting in this thread ? Not a maybe but a good clear look where there was no doubt it was a up right creature on two legs with arms and hands .

 

Yes.    Two for sure.      One was wading, on two feet, arms apparently tucked tight against the body or else at an angle where no light showed between the torso and arms.   It was crotch deep walking down river center in a "run" .. a section that is shallow for quite a ways, fairly wide, with a fast current and somewhat even (cantelope to watermelon sized rounded river rocks) bottom .. big enough the 10 ish mph current couldn't move them, they only moved under flood conditions.    We didn't have great light conditions, it was dusk-ish but since it went around the bend west, we had it backlit and silhouetted against the reflection of post-sunset off the water.   No chance of error under those conditions.   The second was running, bent at the waist, with one arm over/behind it's head, the other in front of its face plowing through low tree branches and moving at very high speed.   The first we watched for 3-5 minutes, best guess.   Could have been more, not likely less given the current speed and the distance traveled.     The second I saw for .. well, under 2 seconds, maybe under 1 second.   Wasn't like I had a stop watch available.

 

But as to the question, absolutely arms, not front legs.    I didn't see clearly enough to see hands vs paws but since they were arms rather than legs, paws make no sense, hands make every bit of sense.

 

MIB

[MIB]

35 minutes ago, 7.62 said:

If we are to take the reports at face value .  If everyone is just mistaken or lying then this is a pretty big industry built off a lie

 

I think a lot of people have observed something but have since weaved interpretation into their observation as they try to explain it to themselves.    I don't think it is a lie.   I think it is difficult to work backwards and separate the interpretations from "pure" observation.    So "at face value" .. I try to be very careful about that.   I'm human, I interpret same as everyone else, I just like to think I do a better than average job of keeping it clear in my mind which is observation and is which is speculative interpretation when interpretation is involved rather than letting the line drift over time.

[MIB]

And so far as "paranormal" .. ANYTHING that falls outside of current science that is real rather than imagined is paranormal.    Paranormal is just the normal we haven't explained yet.    Not necessarily hogwash.    SOMETHING was observed.   SOMETHING left tracks.   SOMETHING left blood or hair.    The question is what label we put on the something, then what reality lies behind the label. 

[norseman]

1 hour ago, PNWexplorer said:

Nope, just a dirt road used for logging originally.  

Where it dead ends, the USFS came in and instead of putting in the normal locked gate, they obliterated the road.  Dug giant pits and made it so that nothing on tires could go further.  Never seen them do that before.

Kelly humps….

[georgerm]

4 hours ago, MIB said:

 

Dr J?   There is no science involved.    Tip: you should look into his background, ALL OF IT, especially his time practicing in Grants  Pass, OR, before you cite him.  

I have been following him since his Sasquatch enounter at the Oregon Caves.  Later he discovers a Sasquatch portal outside Grants Pass, Oregon. 

 

MIB what else do you know? Putting him in questionable light would be counter productive in my ordinary opinion. There is lots of woo associated with him, and I try not to judge but to listen to someone's observations and experience. We all want to know what's up with bigfoot.

[7.62]

1 hour ago, xspider1 said:

 

That’s what they all say!    jj

[7.62]

44 minutes ago, MIB said:

 

Yes.    Two for sure.      One was wading, on two feet, arms apparently tucked tight against the body or else at an angle where no light showed between the torso and arms.   It was crotch deep walking down river center in a "run" .. a section that is shallow for quite a ways, fairly wide, with a fast current and somewhat even (cantelope to watermelon sized rounded river rocks) bottom .. big enough the 10 ish mph current couldn't move them, they only moved under flood conditions.    We didn't have great light conditions, it was dusk-ish but since it went around the bend west, we had it backlit and silhouetted against the reflection of post-sunset off the water.   No chance of error under those conditions.   The second was running, bent at the waist, with one arm over/behind it's head, the other in front of its face plowing through low tree branches and moving at very high speed.   The first we watched for 3-5 minutes, best guess.   Could have been more, not likely less given the current speed and the distance traveled.     The second I saw for .. well, under 2 seconds, maybe under 1 second.   Wasn't like I had a stop watch available.

 

But as to the question, absolutely arms, not front legs.    I didn't see clearly enough to see hands vs paws but since they were arms rather than legs, paws make no sense, hands make every bit of sense.

 

MIB

That's cool thanks for sharing that.

[Catmandoo]

1 hour ago, 7.62 said:

Has anyone actually seen one posting in this thread ? Not a maybe but a good clear look where there was no doubt it was a up right creature on two legs with arms and hands .

Yes. Sasquatch found me before I saw the PGF in this century.  Road crossings, beautiful black hair. Tracks and a trackway. The biggest was bigger than big, thirty something feet away. Probably could have one handed me and tossed me 40 feet without breaking a sweat. That is why I laugh at the plastic skeleton of a silverback lowland gorilla that is in Idaho.

They have hit me with 'the smell' several times. Burns my sinus membranes and the hair on the back of my neck stands up.  Can't leave out 'samurai chatter'.

[7.62]

1 minute ago, Catmandoo said:

Yes. Sasquatch found me before I saw the PGF in this century.  Road crossings, beautiful black hair. Tracks and a trackway. The biggest was bigger than big, thirty something feet away. Probably could have one handed me and tossed me 40 feet without breaking a sweat. That is why I laugh at the plastic skeleton of a silverback lowland gorilla that is in Idaho.

They have hit me with 'the smell' several times. Burns my sinus membranes and the hair on the back of my neck stands up.  Can't leave out 'samurai chatter'.

Thanks for sharing that . I take it you and MIB live out west ? or was this in eastern part of the country ?

[xspider1]

1 hour ago, MIB said:

Paranormal is just the normal we haven't explained yet.  

 

Paranormal, by definition, is: "of or relating to the claimed occurrence of an event or perception without scientific explanation".  We should not insert the idea that 'paranormal' refers only to normal things which have yet to be explained because many claimed occurrences never happened.  So, reports of paranormal activity may be real or, they may be false.  Some reports have no Scientific explanation either known or unknown, in which cases, I would say that those reports are false.   One can interpret any word as they see fit, but without a standard for what words actually mean, we would be lost in any efforts to discuss.  

 

Edited September 18, 2023 by xspider1

[Catmandoo]

7.62

I am in Washington. Mostly west side of the Cascades. 

Edited September 18, 2023 by Catmandoo
text

[7.62]

Just now, Catmandoo said:

I am in Washington. Mostly west side of the Cascades. 

Yeah you are in the right part of the country for this . I'm in the eastern side and even though there have been a few reports of sightings it's not many.

 

[Catmandoo]

7 minutes ago, 7.62 said:

Yeah you are in the right part of the country for this . I'm in the eastern side and even though there have been a few reports of sightings it's not many.

 

What state are you in?

[7.62]

1 hour ago, Catmandoo said:

What state are you in?

CT

 

there's a lot of forest once you drive north to NH and Maine but reports are few . I always said if they are going to live on the east coast Maine is the place they would be . Very little population  in the north woods up there and rough country to travel though once you leave the logging roads 

Edited September 18, 2023 by 7.62

[PNWexplorer]

3 hours ago, norseman said:

Kelly humps….

Nope.  Kelly humps are lateral dirt berms used to control erosion.

 

These are pits randomly dug in the road 3' across and 3' deep.  About a 30' section of road affected.  Then a large dead tree placed across the road.  No gate.  But no way you are going to get an ATV, dirt bike, or Jeep through there.