Seeing Cryptids: The Problems

[The Shrike]

Shrike, so your argument that non-whites don't see Bigfoot because these people just "aren't out there"... Is that a kind of strawman or is it a genuine defensible argument?

If I was a Meldrum or a Bindernagel, etc., this is how I would counter your "bigfoot is a white-guy thing" hypothesis. I'd have abundant data on minority participation in outdoor recreation to support that view.

As mentioned earlier, I generally agree with you that bigfoot is folklore developed and perpetuated by white guys. I just don't think that the prevalence of bigfooty beliefs among white people (and the presumed lack thereof among black people) is defensible as evidence that bigfoot is a white social construct.

 

[William Parcher]

I'd have abundant data on minority participation in outdoor recreation to support that view.

Do non-whites ever go to the woods and if they ever do, do any of them see Bigfoot?

Further, Bigfootery is certainly composed of many people who have never seen Bigfoot but are totally convinced that it exists and say that to other people. Meldrum is one of them. These convicted believers can be anybody living anywhere including those who have no personal access to woods. Yet we still don't see notable non-white representation for that. It seems that wherever or however you see Bigfootery in the world you are seeing almost entirely white guys.


Here again is what Night Walker said that I responded to...

No harm in enjoying what you do and the simple truth is that people from a small but broad cross-section of the community enjoy the Bigfoot phenomenon...

What "cross-section of the community" is he talking about?

 

[ChrisBFRPKY]

Do Bigfooters have an explanation for why Bigfoot does not reveal itself to races other than white folks?

Oprah Winfrey addressed this exact thing of why African Americans don't go camping in 2010. Quoted below from the page here:

http://www.oprah.com/oprahshow/Oprah-and-Gayles-Camping-Adventure-in-Yosemite

"The two best friends are headed to Yosemite National Park in California to help out park ranger Shelton Johnson. Shelton wrote to Oprah because he's concerned by the low number of African-Americans who visit the national parks each year. Out of the 280 million tourists who come, just 1 percent are African-American."

Bolded section: 1 percent out of 280 million. I would say Shrike has a valid argument. African Americans don't seem to embrace the outdoors as much as other ethnic groups.
Chris B.

 

[William Parcher]

Chris, are there visitation figures for blacks going to the woods or just for National Parks?

 

[ChrisBFRPKY]

William, I've never made a study of it. However, I have also noticed that only a small percentage of African Americans seem to take advantage of the outdoors. I don't know why? Personal preference maybe? Given that, it's not surprising to me that Caucasians are reporting most sightings given they're the group typically out there the most. If you figure out the percentages , it's more than likely proportional.
Chris B.

 

[The Shrike]

Do non-whites ever go to the woods

Yes. I've taken some of them there myself.

and if they ever do, do any of them see Bigfoot?

No, because there is no such thing as bigfoot. Do non-whites claim to see bigfoot? Native Americans do. I don't know of any specific bigfooty claims from African-Americans or Asian-Americans.

Further, Bigfootery is certainly composed of many people who have never seen Bigfoot but are totally convinced that it exists and say that to other people.

I've been on the receiving end of this from a Native American student who was completely convinced because bigfoot was "a matter of fact to his people" (paraphrased).

Here again is what Night Walker said that I responded to...
What "cross-section of the community" is he talking about?

I'm with you there - bigfootery is filled with no random cross section of Americans. It's a slice of whiteness.

 

[LTC8K6]

Bolding mine: Oh, but you have seen a track indicating a right turn. That same track is also placed directly on a plow line in a field and has half the foot above the plow line and the other half below it in the much softer tilled ground at the heel. Wonderful example of flexibility. FYI, it also stepped on one of those green walnuts seen in the pics at the heel, forcing it down to where the top of the walnut was at a depth of about 2 inches. That would mean the bottom of the green walnut was about 2 inches deeper than the track, so altogether the walnut is sitting 4 inches deeper than it was before being stepped on. Can you do that? I can't.

I've seen what?

I must have slept through this track presentation.

Anyone know what Chris is talking about?

 

[William Parcher]

...the low number of African-Americans who visit the national parks each year.

Here is a map of National Parks in the USA.

 

[William Parcher]

Anyone know what Chris is talking about?

It looks like a picture of gravel and dirt or sand. It doesn't look like any kind of Bigfoot track to me. It doesn't look like a hoax track because it just looks like a picture of the ground.

 

[Drewbot]

it also stepped on one of those green walnuts seen in the pics at the heel, forcing it down to where the top of the walnut was at a depth of about 2 inches. That would mean the bottom of the green walnut was about 2 inches deeper than the track, so altogether the walnut is sitting 4 inches deeper than it was before being stepped on. Can you do that? I can't.

I've stepped on a Lego in the middle of the night, that had to have gone at least an inch into the arch of my foot. It did not go into the hardwood floor at all. I'd imagine that Bigfoot would howl like me stepping on a lego, if it stepped on a Walnut pushing it 4" into the dirt.

 

[LTC8K6]

It looks like a picture of gravel and dirt or sand. It doesn't look like any kind of Bigfoot track to me. It doesn't look like a hoax track because it just looks like a picture of the ground.

You've seen the "walnut" track?

Where away?

 

[William Parcher]

Not seen the walnut. I'm just taking about the pic posted in this thread.

I also haven't seen any picture of NL's giant corn pile. He also never answered me about the pile being kernels or whole ears or what.

 

[LTC8K6]

I've stepped on a Lego in the middle of the night, that had to have gone at least an inch into the arch of my foot. It did not go into the hardwood floor at all. I'd imagine that Bigfoot would howl like me stepping on a lego, if it stepped on a Walnut pushing it 4" into the dirt.

I've been waiting a long time to see any purported bigfoot track showing the pivot for a turn.

I'd love to see this one.

I don't even care if it's fake.

 

[William Parcher]

More evidence for a mid-tarsal break. Inability to pivot a foot once it is planted and is gripping the ground.

When Bigfoot makes a turn it is forced to go step-step-step-step.

 

[Night Walker]

"if you tried to prove a legal case where there is none i would win bigtime!" LOL?

The hilarity continues below...
...
No, I'm telling you the intended meaning as it was posted, along with definitions since you have a hard time understanding (or rather, insist on not understanding) English well. You seem to be attempting to infer alternative meanings to terms used, even when intended definitions are blatantly pointed out. Another means of dishonesty...
...
Hardly! Also highly entertaining that you would label it as such. Perhaps it has this meaning to yourself, but not to many proponents. Would you call Meldrums "work" in the field of bigfootery performance art? Folklife? Entertainment? How about Ketchums or Dyers? You seem to avoid the world of bigfoot as most of us know it to be. How would you classify the folks mentioned above in your labels?
...
It has already been proven that all resolved bigfoot claims have the outcome of three categories. Feel free to prove otherwise at anytime on that by the way. The case for bigfoot has been demonstrated time and again. Bigfoot = people in one of three categories. 1) Hoaxing/lying/fabricating. 2) Mentally deluded. 3) Occasionally mistaken identity. Bigfoot has been proven. How many examples would you need when ALL resolve to one of those three examples? Feel free to point any resolved bigfoot claims that are not in those categories. Are you suggesting that proponents and skeptics alike have not witnessed this? (prove differently at any time *crickets*) Again, hilarious! "it's fake but its not fraud" Then label it as fake/lore/role playing and not a real entity, then it's not fraud.
...
Are you seriously asking why is it OK for me to specify the meaning of a term I used in a sentence?? haha You can imply whatever meaning you wish, just don't expect to put words (or your own meanings of them) in others mouths/sentences.

I’ve already asked: Are you denying that "fraud" carries any legal connotation at all? You are still cherry picking your definitions to suit as much as anyone else (but that’s ok – its just what people do)…

If Bigfooters are really “ripping people off” and “committing academic fraud” then it would be easy to prove as actual “fraud” within a court of law – that hasn’t happened and is probably not going to happen at all (even for Dyer and Ketchum). You are free to use whatever term you like and terms like “fraud” suit because you can justify it as being the equivalent of “deception” whilst still enjoying the connotations of illegality which makes out the Bigfooters to be wicked people engaged in a dishonest pursuit – that suits your personal narrative of the Bigfoot phenomenon. Congratulations on solving the mystery to your standards. You could write a book about it but it would be a very short one.

All that stuff about corrupting the minds of the youth or whatever isn’t really a valid concern it’s just how you like to blow off steam – blowing Bigfoot all out of proportion therefore makes your opposition to it ennobling rather than rabid. That obviously works for you so, by all means, stick with it…

I’m asking you to think about it instead from more of an anthropological point of view. Anthropologists can get a much deeper level of understanding of cultural beliefs and practices without having to denigrate their subjects as “frauds” and “mentally deluded” but that is ok if that doesn’t interest you. Anthropologists, too, are probably dishonest in your eyes if they do not tell you things in terms that does not fit your own narrative...

The point you seem to deflect from often is; I don't have a problem with monsters and vampires, ghosts etc. I have a problem with labeling them as real entities. That is the rub here. If you tell stories, call them stories. If you write a fictional book, put it in the fiction section. Don't expect skeptics (or most people) to accept this crap as real. Then we have no issues at all with your role playing games. What danger is there in that? Not fun if its "fake"? Only fun if you're lying/deceiving someone?

This is the crux of the issue for you - that people don't adequately label their claims as "stories" or "fiction" or whatever. Boo-hoo... Want a tissue?

I suggest that Bigfooters don't expect skeptics (or most people) to accept what they are saying as real - they are just putting it out there and skeptics (and most people) can believe whatever they like. It's a free country and it's only Bigfoot - the fate of the world is not in the balance, you know (despite the extreme pontifications that come out from both sides of the believer-skeptic divide). It's enough to keep you interested and engaged in the Bigfoot phenomenon so at least in that respect such "lying/deceiving" provides positive motivation for you to remain interested and engaged...

Voltaire is incorrectly quoted as having said, "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." Personally, that works better for me as does a more anthropological approach to Bigfoot but it is obviously not for everyone (and that is ok too)...

 

[River]

I’ve already asked: Are you denying that "fraud" carries any legal connotation at all? You are still cherry picking your definitions to suit as much as anyone else (but that’s ok – its just what people do)…

If Bigfooters are really “ripping people off” and “committing academic fraud” then it would be easy to prove as actual “fraud” within a court of law – that hasn’t happened and is probably not going to happen at all (even for Dyer and Ketchum). You are free to use whatever term you like and terms like “fraud” suit because you can justify it as being the equivalent of “deception” whilst still enjoying the connotations of illegality which makes out the Bigfooters to be wicked people engaged in a dishonest pursuit – that suits your personal narrative of the Bigfoot phenomenon. Congratulations on solving the mystery to your standards. You could write a book about it but it would be a very short one.

All that stuff about corrupting the minds of the youth or whatever isn’t really a valid concern it’s just how you like to blow off steam – blowing Bigfoot all out of proportion therefore makes your opposition to it ennobling rather than rabid. That obviously works for you so, by all means, stick with it…

I’m asking you to think about it instead from more of an anthropological point of view. Anthropologists can get a much deeper level of understanding of cultural beliefs and practices without having to denigrate their subjects as “frauds” and “mentally deluded” but that is ok if that doesn’t interest you. Anthropologists, too, are probably dishonest in your eyes if they do not tell you things in terms that does not fit your own narrative...



This is the crux of the issue for you - that people don't adequately label their claims as "stories" or "fiction" or whatever. Boo-hoo... Want a tissue?

I suggest that Bigfooters don't expect skeptics (or most people) to accept what they are saying as real - they are just putting it out there and skeptics (and most people) can believe whatever they like. It's a free country and it's only Bigfoot - the fate of the world is not in the balance, you know (despite the extreme pontifications that come out from both sides of the believer-skeptic divide). It's enough to keep you interested and engaged in the Bigfoot phenomenon so at least in that respect such "lying/deceiving" provides positive motivation for you to remain interested and engaged...

Voltaire is incorrectly quoted as having said, "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." Personally, that works better for me as does a more anthropological approach to Bigfoot but it is obviously not for everyone (and that is ok too)...

I get it, you dont like bigfoot being labeled as fraud. Guess what? It still is. You can try and change the definitions to ONLY mean legal connotations, but guess what? The ACTUAL definition of the term fits bigfoot perfectly. Bigfoot = fraud.

If this offends you, too bad.

You're right that, you perfectly have the right to lie. Keep at it, and enjoy your dishonesty. I prefer to "keep things real" and stick with an honest lifestyle and description of things in it. The thing you will never change is; a lie is a lie. Deceiving people is fun for you. We get it. I'm sorry (not really?) you have a hard time accepting that some folks prefer truth and reality over lies/fraud.

If you don't like that bigfoot = people 1) Hoaxing/fabricating/lying. 2) Mentally deluded. 3) Occasionally mistaken identity. Then prove it to be ANYTHING other than that. Very simply put, that is bigfoot. No matter how much you complain about it bigfoot = fraud/fake/BS.

 

[ChrisBFRPKY]

I've seen what?

I must have slept through this track presentation.

Anyone know what Chris is talking about?

You likely didn't sleep through it because I never made a presentation for that specific trackway. Some pics of it were on the video you linked to, now deleted from my site as pics of the trackway and the tracks cast that were shown briefly in that video, were meant for internal use only. It was my mistake for not catching it earlier. At the time the video was put together, we hadn't considered the possible negative impact for Bigfooters.

Not really meaning to be secretive but it was decided to give any possible hoaxers (not you specifically) a close look at an actual track would not be beneficial to other Bigfoot researchers.
Chris B.

 

[ChrisBFRPKY]

I've stepped on a Lego in the middle of the night, that had to have gone at least an inch into the arch of my foot. It did not go into the hardwood floor at all. I'd imagine that Bigfoot would howl like me stepping on a lego, if it stepped on a Walnut pushing it 4" into the dirt.

Ouch about the lego. I'm no stranger at stepping on kid's toys in the middle of the night too. I guess the Bigfoot wasn't comfortable with stepping on the green walnut either. Those things are hard, but the ground it compressed it into was soft. Had it stepped on a green walnut on an oak floor, the result would have likely been a smashed walnut and a sore heel I suppose.
Chris B.

 

[William Parcher]

Not really meaning to be secretive but it was decided to give any possible hoaxers (not you specifically) a close look at an actual track would not be beneficial to other Bigfoot researchers.

Never mind your pictures. Sounds like you Bigfooters will have a serious problem with guys who have seen genuine Bigfoot tracks in the wild and then go on to create hoax tracks that look just like what they saw in the wilderness.

Do you know if the walnut trackway you saw was the real deal or a perfect but fake replication by somebody who had previously seen the real deal?

 

[carlitos]

Are there non-whites in those places and are they reporting Bigfoot encounters?

Many "non-whites" have actual monsters living in their neighborhoods, so they don't need to invent bigfoots to keep the kids' heads down at night.

William, I've never made a study of it. However, I have also noticed that only a small percentage of African Americans seem to take advantage of the outdoors. I don't know why? Personal preference maybe? Given that, it's not surprising to me that Caucasians are reporting most sightings given they're the group typically out there the most. If you figure out the percentages , it's more than likely proportional.
Chris B.

"The outdoors" ≠ national parks.