Bigfoot redeux

[carajou]

Fruitcake can be found at the local hardware store every Christmas.

In fact, they are quite useful whenever a hammer gets busted and you need a good backup!

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

A Handbook of Civil War Bullets and Cartridges - Grab it through Amazon!

[jeff of pa]

 

[JT]

You scared me...I thought the first picture was my Mother-in Law....

 

[Michigan Badger]

Personally I believe in Nessie. Now Bigfoot I'm a little shaky on but Nessie is for real.
Have you ever seen Kent Hoven's documentary on dinosaurs? It's a real eye opener. You'll never see this stuff on prime time TV. They don't even dare joke about it.

There?s a large swamp in Africa where the natives swear they?ve seen dinos.

Ness is just another (though super rare) animal.

I wonder what Nessie would taste like deep fried?

 

[jeff of pa]

I wonder what Nessie would taste like deep fried?

CHICKEN OF COURSE

 

[Oroblanco]

Greetings Carajou,
I hope you have been proposing these steps tongue in cheek. Concerning Bigfoot for example, in a number of places it IS illegal to shoot at, chase, or harm in any way these unproven creatures. The skeptics love to trash the whole subject and stoop to calling names of those who are convinced these elusive things exist, not taking into consideration how they would look if and when one of the creatures is proven to be reality. Anyone who chooses not to "believe" is welcome to their opinion, however close-minded. However, a point was raised which is important - that if they are "animals" they would be caught, just like the supposedly mythical giant squids - well it is quite possible that Bigfoot is NOT an animal but another type of human being! Homo Meganthropus, specifically has the right attributes to be Bigfoot, Yeti, etc and is human - if you were to shoot and kill one of these non-offensive things you have just committed homicide by definition of the law! So yes you might well prove the existence to "science" (a truly over-rated accomplishment, since the world of "science" is full of folks with very closed minds) but it is unlikely you would profit by this, instead you might well do TIME as a ward of the state! There are a number of reasons to suspect that Bigfoot is not Gigantopithecus (a giant ape) but a giant type of human, including the ability to avoid humans when it desires.

It is a commonality among treasure hunters to be intrigued by mysteries other than lost treasures, but would you really want to encourage a bunch of yay-hoos to run around in the big woods firing guns at MAN-shaped objects? Personally I would prefer they not be banging away at human-like shapes. There are other ways to prove the existence of supposedly mythical animals anyway, though photographs, video, tracks etc are not considered "proof" - and without killing one. Removing one of these animals (or other human types) from their environment might have a catastrophic effect on their population, since in no case can any of them be considered "numerous" in fact you could be removing the only surviving member of a particular gender, or the only one capable of reproducing etc. Even if you were to capture, tag and release the critter, you could have just exposed it to a disease that it has no defense against, or stressed it physically to the point that it will not survive - or worse have removed its natural fear of humans, so that it becomes a danger to others.

If one desires to be the one who proved some mythical creature exists for the fame and fortune, then I would hope this person would be intelligent enough NOT to harm or kill one of the rarest of creatures simply for fifteen minutes of fame and profit. Fame and money are fleeting things, difficult to retain for any length of time and with their own sets of problems.

Now where did I leave my Jersey devil traps...
Oroblanco

 

[JT]

Just because a person doesn't believe in Bigfoot, Leprechuans, or the Tooth Fairy does not in any way make them "close minded". If you want to believe in a fantasy, more power to you. Heck, I believe that someday I'll hit the Powerball Lottery....of course, the odds are better of that happening than of someone conclusively proving Bigfoot exists. The burden of proof rests on the believers...not the non-believers.

A creature that stands 8-10 foot tall has supposedly roamed the country for hundreds of years, from Alaska to Florida. This would call for a pretty healthy breeding poulation, because even if they have frequent flier miles, a population of less than , say, 100 couldn't account for all of the alledged sightings. Think about it. For all of the reported sightings, how much concrete evidence exists? Zero. Film has been faked, pictures faked, footprints faked....and no physical remains have been found. Oh, one guy claims to have had Bigfoot poop stored in his freezer for a few years, the National Enquirer manages to score a Bigfoot interview at least once a year (but only after they break the yearly story of how our President meets with space aliens to forge an intergalactic truce), and "researchers" claim to be right on the verge of discovery (but please send donations).

I hope one is found, dead or alive, just to put closure to the issue. But look at it this way. We found Saddam hiding in a spiderhole in the desert. We can walk on the moon, and we can land a rover on Mars, and drive it around like it's a video game. But, somehow, we can't prove the existence of a 10 foot tall apeman roaming the continental US for hundreds of years. All of the hunters spending time in the woods, and no one shoots one. The one guy that always carried a gun with him strangely decided out of the blue to take a movie camera with him one day instead of his rifle, and SHAZAM....the Patterson film was made that one day....now it's been analyzed and shown to be fake, and his accomplice has admitted it's fake.

I'm going to continue to wait, lottery tickets in hand, for proof of Bigfoot. I just don't see myself getting rich, or seeing the proof, either.

 

[beeper]

A. Film has been faked, pictures faked, footprints faked....and no physical remains have been found. Oh, one guy claims to have had Bigfoot poop stored in his freezer for a few years, the National Enquirer manages to score a Bigfoot interview at least once a year

one more time!

The Patterson footage has never been debunked as a hoax. No one has ever demonstrated how it was done. Neither the original "costume," nor a matching costume, has ever been presented by honest skeptics, nor by various imposters who claim to have worn the costume.

Large amounts of money have been spent trying to make a matching costume. The best Hollywood costume design talents have been brought to the task, but have never succeeded. The British Broadcasting Corporation spent the most money so far. They failed miserably. The side-by-side results are shown below.

Every attempt and failure to make a similar costume strengthens the case for authenticity of the Patterson footage. Comparing a man in a costume side by side with the Patterson creature in motion helps highlight the striking anatomical peculiarities.


* Where is the costume?
* If the original costume is gone, why can't they make an identical costume and do it again? Why is that so hard?
* Why does the news media always trumpet every half-baked "man in the costume" story that comes along without asking for the obvious proof, which should be so simple to provide?

TV Commercials for Tabloid Program Misinform Millions of Americans and Canadian about the Patterson Footage

In the late 1990's most television viewers in the United States were exposed to television commercials for a deceptive tabloid program claiming to hold the final resolution to the bigfoot mystery. The commercials had an authoritative sounding narrator calmly claiming the upcoming program was going to expose the bigfoot legend and the Patterson footage as a hoax.

Those commercials -- not the program itself -- served to announce that the Patterson footage was fake.

It was pure tabloid television. The program itself was a sham. Fortunately it was graphically obvious that it was a sham. But most people only saw the commercials and only remembered the deceptive message.

Those commercials, for a program produced by the BBC's own Natural History unit, called "X-Creatures," were in heavy rotation for weeks. Every family watching television in the late 1990's saw those commercials several times. They are the main reason many people will make the assertion that the Patterson footage was "shown to be a hoax".

Many people were trained, in effect, to say this, and to think this about the Patterson footage, because some fraudulent TV commercials.

Curiously, many of the same people who accept what they heard on those commercials still believe bigfoots do exist, because they personally know some witnesses, or know people who know witnesses. It seems that people are able to separate the two ideas, bigfoots and the Patterson footage. But the Patterson footage has never been debunked, especially not by the fraudulent tabloid farce made by the BBC.

 

[Oroblanco]

Greetings JI et al,

Your opening statement shows where you stand ? you equate Bigfoot with Leprechauns and the Tooth fairy. For you that is probably the case, all are equally unbelievable since there is no dead body to prove any of them to exist.

I would point out that these could hardly be more different. Has the tooth fairy ever left tracks, hair or droppings? Recently more impressions than footprints have been found too. Belief in a fantasy? I did not say anywhere that I ?believe? in Bigfoot, and for that matter it is not a matter of belief ? you are either convinced they exist, not convinced they exist, or have closed your mind to the possibility that they could exist. There surely is enough evidence to justify pursuing the question, however ?real? scientists largely refuse even to examine the evidence. Those few who have, are notable in that their view has changed to supporting the existence ? Jane Goodall for one example, and if your interest warrants it, I would suggest you check out the evidence and articles on:
http://www.bfro.net/
and
http://www.gcbro.com/
The thousands of sightings are not ?nothing? and if you think so, try standing trial while eyewitnesses testify against you. One of the big skeptics points is that if such creatures existed, how could so many have escaped detection well they have not escaped detection, they are sighted all the time. Without a dead body, ?science? will not admit they exist ? yet in nature dead bodies are disposed of relatively quickly. Ask any state wildlife biologist how many dead bears have ever been found ? this of a large animal well known and quite numerous. (None have ever been found, that died of natural causes. )

Pretty much it is a safe bet that science is NOT going to be convinced, not in our lifetime ? however the statements that we found Saddam in a hole in Iraq and ?put a man on the moon? are really wide of the mark here ? we had over 100,000 people, satellites, infrared detectors, bribes etc out hunting for Saddam, in a country where everyone KNEW exactly who he was, in an area no larger than California, and it still took weeks and weeks to find him. The same line of reasoning would mean that Bin Ladin should be easy to find too ? and again even with the top technology available, thousands of people hunting him, huge bribes and rewards etc he is still running around making tapes. Also, since the last trip to the moon we have not been able to put a man on the moon again ? according to Nasa we don?t have the technology! Even the blueprints to the Saturn V rocket (the only one big enough to take men to the moon and back) were destroyed as a part of the bargain to get Nasa the space shuttle. Not a good bargain, in my opinion, but the point is we may be advanced but we are not SO advanced that things cannot escape detection. No amount of effort even a tiny fraction of that spent on finding Saddam or Bin Ladin has been spent to find, capture or kill a Bigfoot ? every attempt has been privately funded and executed, and very small in scale.

I still hold that trying to convince ?science? is a waste of time and effort, (from hard experience) but it is possible to satisfy your own curiosity ? just go spend some time in the remote areas where Bigfoot have been recently reported. Seeing is believing, not seeing would be fair proof to you that they do not exist. Of course, if you don?t see a deer then deer don?t exist either, but?at least you will be out in some really pretty country. I would not expect to see any leprechauns or tooth fairies however.

I mentioned that it is not worth the effort to try to convince academics. For one example. (not related to Bigfoot, but the parallels are) I sent photos of a strange stone found in what appeared to be a tomb in Maine to a noted "expert" epigrapher. I asked him if he could decipher it. He wrote back that it was quite easy to read, that it was either Phoenician or very early Greek, and said ?goddess of the night? or ?queen of the night?. He also asked where it had been found. When I told him that it was found in Maine, he wrote back and told me not to use his name in any way relating to the artifact, nor his translation etc for publication. (I am a writer) Historians do not accept that people from the Mediterranean might have visited Maine in ancient times, so the artifact (among many) is loudly ignored.

In a way I understand the attitude ? it could be career suicide for an academic to take a stand on some subject which is frowned upon by the ?experts? ? they risk losing their job, professional ridicule etc and worse - what if the subject were later proven to be false! However in my opinion a "true" scientist of any subject should be brave enough to examine evidence, which the majority will not do, at least not if it falls outside of accepted dogma.

Science in a way has become a new type of religion ? members of the religion insist on belief in the ?accepted? theories, and dismissal of all evidence which is outside of {or contrary to} the accepted theories. Those who choose to consider Bigfoot to be equivalent to the Tooth Fairy are free to do so, but do not be offended if those who have examined the evidence and are convinced the strange humanoid does exist consider you to be close-minded. As is the case with any mystery, examine the evidence for yourself before accepting either the ?dogma? of academia OR the claims of witnesses. As a treasure hunter you are already familiar with the process of weighing the evidence, filtering reports for what is true and what is false, so I am surprised that you would not apply the same set of truth finding practices to Bigfoot. Many supposedly ?incredible? things have been proven, from the ?mythical? monster of the deep, the Kraken, now officially accepted as the Giant Squid to such "fantasy" creatures as unicorns ? which were actually the result of reports garbled in translation in ancient times of the one-horned Asian rhino.

You are also a betting man ? and are aware of the concept that you cannot win the lottery if you do not buy a ticket; likewise it is not possible to be convinced of the truth or falsehood about Bigfoot without examining the evidence for yourself. Don?t take anyone else?s word on the subject (including me) just decide for yourself. I would bet that you will find the truth.

Oroblanco

There is nothing concealed that will not be disclosed, or hidden that will not be made known. Matthew 10:26 KJV NT

For there is nothing hidden that will not be disclosed, and nothing concealed that will not be known or brought out into the open. Luke 8:17 KJV NT

"Recognize what is in your sight, and that which is hidden from you will become plain to you . For there is nothing hidden which will not become manifest." Gospel of Thomas 5

?For nothing hidden will not become manifest, and nothing covered will remain without being uncovered.? Ibid 11