Bigfoot Makes House Calls?

[Guest RioBravo]

Saskeptic, nobody has ever said you shouldn't ask questions. The Bigfoot Forum IS debate. Something skeptics may wish to consider though. Out of all the pics, and stories of encounters presented here, how many have you chosen to believe? Chris B.

How many have led to irrefutable physical evidence?

If people can't handle their movies, pictures, sounds, or stories being scrutinized, they should post them on BFRO's forums.

[Guest]

How many have led to irrefutable physical evidence?

If people can't handle their movies, pictures, sounds, or stories being scrutinized, they should post them on BFRO's forums.

Please explain to me how you can get irrefutable physical evidence on any internet forum. Scrutiny is fine, but scrutiny does not need to be insulting.

[Guest ChrisBFRPKY]

How many have led to irrefutable physical evidence?

If people can't handle their movies, pictures, sounds, or stories being scrutinized, they should post them on BFRO's forums.

I think JC already summed it up pretty good. The point is this is a Bigfoot discussion Forum, you won't find a body here. If you drag every single witness thru the mud for having discussed their encounter, and you accuse every single witness of being a liar or hoaxer, soon there won't be any discussions because nobody is gonna come forward and volunteer to share anything. Personally, I think I'm wise enough to wade thru the encounter/evidence that is questionable to me in order to get to the ones that really ring true to me. I'm sure we can all do the same. This forum is made up of all types of people, some may come to share a story with good intentions, some may come to share a story with another agenda. I think I'm intelligent enough to see the difference and I'm sure you are too.

Chris B.

[Guest River]

Ben, I can see where you're coming from. I agree of course that everyone should expect to be questioned about their sighting and the sighting should be discussed where forum appropriate (and here is A-OK) I just feel like once your questions have been answered, and you have reviewed the evidence submitted along with the testimony of the witness(s), it's time to end the interview and make your own decision. That decision if negative, and if further discussed, should not insult another member or imply the member has lied, either directly or indirectly. I've taken reports from people I whole heartedly believe were credible. I've also taken reports from people that I know were less than credible, but I didn't hound them every day trying to get them to admit they had lied to me. I just threw the report out and proceeded to the next one. No harm done.

I understand you cannot see a creature in the pic Sasfooty presented, ok, I can't either but that's no excuse to say there's absolutely nothing in the pic. When you say there's nothing there, you commit to an absolute, that means in effect, anyone that says there IS something in the pic is not telling the truth according to you. Well, that statement is a sure fire recipe for problems. First, you'll likely be reported for calling another member a liar/hoaxer. Second, nobody will ever offer to share anything with us on the forum if they're called "liar" or "hoaxer" for their efforts. In my opinion, the pic that sasfooty presented is of too poor quality to show the subject(s) clearly, it's blurry at the required zoom and I can't determine a subject(s) in the pic. That doesn't knock sasfooty for presenting it, and it certainly does NOT suggest sasfooty hasn't told the truth. I'm sure she has. I'm glad she did present her encounters and her pic and I'd be honored to look at anything else she provides. Whether I believe her or not, I can be polite though right? Chris B.

Well Chris, this is where we disagree. I don't think that we should neccesarily "throw out" the report and move to the next one. It's worth of discussion for many reasons. A huge part of the "bigfoot world" and all that is bigfoot are reports similar to this one. I would be guessing at a certain percent or number, but I'm going to go ahead and toss out the 90% number that saskeptic used previously after years of experience reading and looking into bigfoot related claims. A good way to counter that would be to ask: How many of them turned out to be "the real deal"? (as far as evidence claims, or things that are presented publically)

This is an important part of the culture, and the people involved with it. I don't think we should stop talking about it or refuse to have an opinion just because someone is a "witness" and we disagree with that they present. Personally, I'd much rather have someones honest input and opinion rather than a glossed over one. I haven't seen anyone "attack" the witness, or for that matter even approach them with the same demeanor they have personally used when addressing others in the thread.

To me this is reminiscent of Mary Green, and Janice Carter but just not as extreme. (the witness admits she is witholding certain opinions for fear of other reactions as well) Why should we be silent or not feel comfortable adressing these type of things when it happens? Should we always either accept or walk away? (and why?)

I think this is an important part of the bigfoot legend. I do think sometimes people are duped by stories and end up wasting resources and time because of it sometimes. (although mostly, its just readers entertained) I personally find the stories entertaining and I've enjoyed the thread and engaging the OP on the topic of her claims. It doesn't mean anyone is trying to belittle or berate. It "might" mean, we seek the truth and are sharing our opinions about it. If the OP did not wish to have critial or skeptical feedback they could've just as well posted in the sightings subforum, and asked folks not to give that sort of feedback. I saw nothing of the sort in this thread. I saw the OP engaged in the conversations.

Another good point is: Without opposing positions, how fun or entertaining would this be? What if everyone just went "wow" and sat there wide eyed and intently listening taking it all in as truth and fact. How entertaining would that be? How a diverse perspective is perceived is another matter.

Which is better than the other? Who is right? Who is attacking who? I think the answers to those questions is "none of the above". I also don't think we should have to sit down and shut up when these things come forth. Why should we? For the better of the community? (think carefully about that one) Should we allow "weeding out" or should we more just listen, to everyones opinion on things. This is a dicussion forum right? I don't see the insulting and attacking at all. I see people engaging in conversations and making up their own minds about it.

That being said, I'v enjoyed sasyfoots posts and do not wish to "run anyone off". I'd much rather her stick around and feel free to give her opinion to anyone she wishes.

The last point I wanted to make is this one. Do we want this subject to be taken serious? Do we want scientific acknowledgement? Do we want the species cataloged/discovered? Most of us here: Yes. Absolutely. Those with habituations or sasquatches regularly on their property always have an excuse as to why they can not or will not take any photos, or collect viable evidence. They have a lot of stories to share. Cool, I enjoy the stories. The point is, any animal leaves evidence. Any animal can be photographed. (if its there) Feel free to pick any animal I claim to see on my property and I will give you evidence of that animal. (photographic evidence, or biological, or anything to validate the claim) There is a reason why these people that make those claims do not present any real evidence of it. I think you know what my opinion on that is.

If you expect science to take this subject seriously, or there to ever be funding for this type of research - should we accept this type of stuff as evidence? I don't think it requires being politcally correct and saying "it doesnt mean I dont believe you" etc etc. I think we are free to have our opinions and express them. I don't believe her stories as truth. There is absolutely nothing in those photo outlines. I heard coyotes and other known animals in the audio. I think a lot of these type of claims fit into the category of pareidolia.

This doesnt mean that is certain, or that I'm correct. It's my opinion. The OP could also just be pulling peoples legs. Anyhow, we disagree fundamentally on this topic I'm sure. We will have to agree to disagree Chris.

[Guest River]

Feel free to call it as you see it (or rather don't see it). Feel free to act anyway you want to act, anonymously on a internet forum. I use my real name. I want witnesses to contact me or my organization. Berating witnesses on the internet would be counter-productive for me. Feel free to bully and be negative on the internet. If you would scroll up you would see I posted I did not see anything. Does this behavior make you feel empowered? Do you get a rush from insulting people?

Everyone knows my name here too. It's Ben River. I don't see any "bullying" at all, or berating.

3bullyverb

bul·liedbul·ly·ing

Definition of BULLY

transitive verb

1: to treat abusively

2: to affect by means of force or coercion

be·rate   /bɪˈreɪt/ Show Spelled

[bih-reyt] Show IPA

–verb (used with object), -rat·ed, -rat·ing.

to scold; rebuke: He berated them in public.

Use berating in a Sentence

See images of berating

Search berating on the Web

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Origin:

1540–50; be- + rate2

—Synonyms

abuse, vilify, vituperate, objurgate.

I see people forming an opinion based on what is presented. Where did you see any bullying/berating? Can you specifically point it out please?

As for "getting a rush out of insulting people" Who is really being insulted here?

Edited November 14, 2010 by River

[Guest ChrisBFRPKY]

Ben, we're likely not as far apart as you may think. I'd stay away from the 90% number though as it's kinda slippery. As far as the skeptic is concerned, there are no credible reports they will accept in the remaining 10% either....Chris B.

[indiefoot]

River,

How many examples of purported Bigfoot evidence have you accepted as genuine and evidence that a Bigfoot was responsible for the example?

What are the chances that an unqualified homeowner with no scientific training could have presented evidence that you would have accepted as evidence that her claims were genuine? Would it be a safe bet that anything short of a body or a significant piece of one would have fallen short?

Saskeptic,

You don't appreciate having your credentials questioned even though we have a documented history of hoaxing as far as qualifications are concerned. I believe that before we accuse, imply, or insinuate someone of hoaxing or lying we should have evidence that will support it. Otherwise we are just throwing mud and waiting to see what sticks.

Sometimes, if someone has a story to tell and they make it clear that they can't "prove" what they are reporting we just need to listen, ask questions and refrain from "nagging" about the proof that we already know isn't coming. After a while, give it a rest and let the rest of us listen.

BTW, when I look at Sasfooty's photo, I see what looks like a figure headed away from the camera and into the bushes. It looks like it could be the bottom of the right foot facing the camera. Do I see the rest of the figures Sunflower outlined, no. Do I think the possible figure that I have outlined is clear enough to try and defend, no. When you go that far into a picture you have to take what you see with a grain of salt. (Where have I heard that?)

I would like for Sasfooty to stick around and share whatever experience she can with whoever is interested.

[Sunflower]

Indie,

Thanks for the comment. Sasfooty's comment was and I agreed with her that there are some blobs in there. I only commented to her about the one walking and showing motion with the foot in the air and several possible shadowfolk in its immediate area. I was very excited to see the walking motion and that's all I was concerned about that day.

Honestly, got busy after that day. However, I do see blobs where she has noted but sharp lines there are very difficult. She was very excited as was I.

[Guest Vincent]

Wouldnt it be easier, in Sasfootys case, to simply go outside (daytime) and pick up a few hair samples? if they are in close enough proximaty to see them (including to observe one of the females acting like a tart) or hear them(giving birth) and to have descriptions of how powerful their claws and teeth are, etc, that means they are...close. it sounds like they are close enough that just scouring the trees in her backyard would weild a hair sample.

Maybe if she wants to keep it a secret/protect the

habitat/not be bothered by all the money, she can then instead send the hair samples to a trusted, bigfoot

researcher for dna tests,, which would clearly show primate related hair. location anonymos, submitted by unknown. the bigfoots will be safe and sasfooty wont be bothered by all that pesky money or recognition of introducing ine of the greatest finds in science. ever.

Edited November 15, 2010 by Vincent

[Guest River]

River,

How many examples of purported Bigfoot evidence have you accepted as genuine and evidence that a Bigfoot was responsible for the example?

What are the chances that an unqualified homeowner with no scientific training could have presented evidence that you would have accepted as evidence that her claims were genuine? Would it be a safe bet that anything short of a body or a significant piece of one would have fallen short?

None. There is currently no verified sasquatch evidence. If there was the species would be cataloged and we would be talking about habitat, features, and other characteristics here instead of if or if not they exist.

My bolding. Pick any animal that ventures onto my property regularly. I will show you evidence of that animal in some form (photographic or video, and or biological evidence) If you don't believe me, try it yourself. Choose any animal you see on your property. See if you can some how document its existence in any of those forms of evidence. Given you had a bigfoot on your property, how hard would you be trying to get that evidence? Do you think there were be any present given the situation sasyfoot described in these threads?

That being said, I think the strongest (as far as eye witness testimony goes) type of reports made by people would be someone like Yellowstones Bob Jackson. There are only two scenarios possible. He saw bigfoot, or he made it up. I don't find it likely that he had mistaken identity. Given his experience as a woodsman and his position along with his willingness to speak about it openly, I'd say he's a great witness.

[Guest]

Saskeptic,

You don't appreciate having your credentials questioned even though we have a documented history of hoaxing as far as qualifications are concerned.

I don't mind that people ask. When they do, I describe them. If they don't believe me, who cares? Qualifications are completely irrelevant to the great majority of topics we discuss on the BFF.

I believe that before we accuse, imply, or insinuate someone of hoaxing or lying we should have evidence that will support it. Otherwise we are just throwing mud and waiting to see what sticks.

Sometimes, if someone has a story to tell and they make it clear that they can't "prove" what they are reporting we just need to listen, ask questions and refrain from "nagging" about the proof that we already know isn't coming. After a while, give it a rest and let the rest of us listen.

(Bolding mine.)

I'm willing to bet that the majority of my posts in this thread were not questions I had for Sasfooty, but my response to questions directed to me. I could make a nice case for being nagged myself . . .

[masterbarber]

He didn't nag her,

He blinded her with science........

[Guest]

Saskeptic Said: " Qualifications are completely irrelevant to the great majority of topics we discuss on the BFF. "

That stinks. I worked really long and ******* my study of exotic dancers.

[Guest UPs]

Last year, I posted a story on the jawbone I had come across in the woods and all of the other weird stuff at the same location. It happened near my private property in a quite remote area with other private property owners nearby. I finally decided to go back and search for this bone and posted a few pics of my attempt. The pictures were what I considered sterile and I was not able to find that jawbone, but did find other bones near where I believe I came across the jawbone.

Why do I bring this up? A few weeks after that post, I went back up there and found boot prints along the road on my property and into my 'driveway'. 2 months later, someone took a snowmobile and drove right to my 'driveway' (its a rough dirt road) and this person got off and walked along my property line. This person then went to the exact spot that I referenced in my picture and snowshoed back into the area where I had found the bones, but they appeared to be stumped as to where to go after about 150 yards. The person then went through my neighbors posted private property.

Does anyone remember what happened to the MRP? If not, look it up. A large bf group (not BFRO) posted the location online. Those of you who have your own property and value your privacy can understand how I felt when I came across those tracks. There are groups and people who can be trusted, but be advised there are people out there who will use a seemingly sterile piece of information to find your location. If its public land, this may not be a factor, but if you value your privacy, keep your stories as sterile as possible if you share them on a public forum.

[Guest]

drat, auto censor ruined a good joke.