indiefoot Posted March 3, 2011 Share Posted March 3, 2011 Many have suggested that BF may be very intelligent. Just because they don't use technology doesn't mean they can't form an understanding or concept of it's use. They may have watched people taking pictures and they likely have seen magazines along the road, I know I have. If they communicate with one another, they may discuss the activities that they have witnessed and question their purpose. If they do have an elementary understanding of the concept, I'm sure it would be a mystery how it works and may well be seen as a type of paranormal activity on their part that they don't want anything to do with. Fear and anger are common reactions to things we don't understand, IMO. Maybe more so in primitive peoples. These are just suggestions as to why a primitive hominid might show an aversion to all sorts of electronics. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Woodslore Posted March 3, 2011 Author Share Posted March 3, 2011 Just about to ask Sasfooty if you'd ever had anyone camp in the yard. Than saw the tent comment. So I'll ask anyway. Ever have anyone try a camp out in your yard or neighbours? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted March 3, 2011 Share Posted March 3, 2011 May I ask, why do you post here if you don't accept answers to your questions? I've been curious because when someone answers you to the best of their knowledge you seem quite unsatisfied? There are answers to my questions that I do accept as plausible; there are others that are not. I have not yet seen an explanation I consider plausible regarding how bigfoots would know what a camera is or, if somehow they did, why they would be averse to one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Sallaranda Posted March 3, 2011 Share Posted March 3, 2011 There are answers to my questions that I do accept as plausible; there are others that are not. I have not yet seen an explanation I consider plausible regarding how bigfoots would know what a camera is or, if somehow they did, why they would be averse to one. See indiefoot's response above. Pretty plausible explanation if you ask me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Blackdog Posted March 3, 2011 Share Posted March 3, 2011 How would a bigfoot make the relationship between an image in a magazine and a box with a hole in the front if it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest gershake Posted March 3, 2011 Share Posted March 3, 2011 (edited) ^ What Blackdog said... even if they're intelligent I have no idea how they could possibly come to the conclusion that pictures and cameras are related. I asked this in another topic; I recall hearing on some TV program that humans are the only animals that can see two-dimensionally (i. e. we interpret a third dimension into pictures instead of seeing just a colourful flat area). Anyone know whether that is true? (Not that the answer would automatically mean anything for sasquatch vision, just something I'm curious about). - Shake Edited March 3, 2011 by gershake Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted March 3, 2011 Share Posted March 3, 2011 There are answers to my questions that I do accept as plausible; there are others that are not. I have not yet seen an explanation I consider plausible regarding how bigfoots would know what a camera is or, if somehow they did, why they would be averse to one. Thanks for the answer! Till some sort of communication with BF can be established, all behaviors are still a mystery. In my opinion relentless questioning of witness's isn't going provide more information than was already given. They don't know either. All we have are "demonstrated behaviors" to base an opinion on, or extrapolate from. JMO If camera traps and handheld cameras don't work, move on.....they now make spyware for hats, button-cams ect....so use something else. It isn't the issue it's been whipped up to be. I also have no clue why BF is Camera-Adverse. At some point it's the intelligent thing to accept what-is instead of beating a dead horse. There's a saying about doing the same things over & over expecting different results being the defination of insanity? Camera traps haven't worked in the past = try something else. Debating BF behavior doesn't change BF behavior = try something else Turns out where ever you are, changing something in the enviornment (sp) elicits a response, giving a researcher access to more data. Works to a degree = try that again! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Sallaranda Posted March 3, 2011 Share Posted March 3, 2011 How would a bigfoot make the relationship between an image in a magazine and a box with a hole in the front if it? I was just referring Saskeptic to another point to see what he had to say about it. That's not my own opinion. My own opinion is that cameras are simply something unknown to Bigfoot. Unknown, manmade, and thus possibly harmful. I'm sure Sasquatch figures humans are out to kill it - so any device made by humans must therefore be considered a threat. It's as simple as that. I'm sure you could put a microwave into the forest and Sasquatch would start throwing rocks at it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest shelley7950 Posted March 3, 2011 Share Posted March 3, 2011 In answer to Gershake's question---yes, there are some animals that can "see" in 2D...there are dogs that watch TV (see any episode of America's Funniest Videos )and there was a Border Collie recently shown on Nova, and a bonobo (Kanzi) that could look at a picture of an object, then go fetch that object from another room---in other words, they understood that the 2D photo represented an actual 3D object that was not present. However, I'm not aware of any animal that figured out the connection between a camera and a photograph, nor do I think there are any animals that understand that a photo represents THEMSELVES...there are a few animals (dolphins, elephants, great apes) that appear to have the self awareness necessary to recognize themselves in a mirror, but I don't THINK there are any that recognize themselves in a photo... Also, I can't imagine how bigfoot would make the connection between a gamecam, a photo, and that the photo represented them...even human beings unfamiliar with gamecams don't know what they are...seems like a huge stretch to me Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southernyahoo Posted March 3, 2011 Share Posted March 3, 2011 It might be possible that they could understand that humans look through boxes with holes in them while aimed at animals. Maybe they don't like being looked at that much. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest gershake Posted March 3, 2011 Share Posted March 3, 2011 (edited) In answer to Gershake's question---yes, there are some animals that can "see" in 2D...there are dogs that watch TV (see any episode of America's Funniest Videos )and there was a Border Collie recently shown on Nova, and a bonobo (Kanzi) that could look at a picture of an object, then go fetch that object from another room---in other words, they understood that the 2D photo represented an actual 3D object that was not present. Thanks, very interesting!! All I know is that our cat can't see in 2D. He does sometimes look at the TV (and I know some dogs do, I thought maybe it was social behaviour?), but once we had a program about mice on. He recognized what it was about from the sounds the mice made, then climbed behind the TV to go look for them. Edited March 3, 2011 by gershake Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Blackdog Posted March 3, 2011 Share Posted March 3, 2011 I was just referring Saskeptic to another point to see what he had to say about it. That's not my own opinion. My own opinion is that cameras are simply something unknown to Bigfoot. Unknown, manmade, and thus possibly harmful. I'm sure Sasquatch figures humans are out to kill it - so any device made by humans must therefore be considered a threat. It's as simple as that. I'm sure you could put a microwave into the forest and Sasquatch would start throwing rocks at it. But yet they run around Sasfooty's neighborhood, crawl on her roof, steal cigarettes and peek in her windows. She's aldo talked about gifting bigfoot with man made objects. It doesn't seem to me that they care much about man made things if all these things are to be considered true. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
indiefoot Posted March 3, 2011 Share Posted March 3, 2011 How would a bigfoot make the relationship between an image in a magazine and a box with a hole in the front if it? The same way you or I might, with a logical deduction. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest gershake Posted March 3, 2011 Share Posted March 3, 2011 A logical deduction based on what? They've never seen a photograph from a camera get developed in a lab and have nobody to tell them that that happens. If they could make a connection between cameras and photographs that would make it all the less understandable why they fear them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest shelley7950 Posted March 3, 2011 Share Posted March 3, 2011 You're welcome It should be noted that both the Border Collie and Kanzi the bonobo had received literally thousands of hours of training in order to do this...The Border Collie owner, who was a retired Psych professor, said he had trained the dog for 4 hours a day, every day, since it was a puppy....and Kanzi was raised from an infant with humans...so it's highly doubtful that a naive wild population of Border Collies, bonobos, or Bigfoots, would be able to successfully recognize a photo...(although I am liking the idea of a population of naive wild Border Collies )... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts