• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

Merged Bigfoot follies

Status
Not open for further replies.
The odds for a Bigfoot sighting increase with more time spent in the field.
Chris B.
No one has ever seen a bigfoot in the field, the woods, or anywhere but their mind.
So, because my opinion of Bigfoot differs from your's I'm a BLAARGER?
That doesn't demonstrate a deep seated content with your position now does it?
The extreme lack of bigfoot determines my confidence in the no bigfoot hypothesis. Your BLAARGing makes you a BLAARGer. I've seen your website; you must be playing.

But, that's ok. If you like, you can call me stinky because I've seen something you haven't. Same principle. Really now. Chris B.
I've seen some of the things you claim to be bigfoot. They aren't. Perhaps you need new lenses, or more likely, you're playing.
 
Last edited:
As far as the BLAARGing thing goes, who knows? Chris might be one who actually believes the things he says (although I doubt it), but it's either that, or he's prone to whimsy and wrong. If seeing a BF were as simple as putting in time outdoors, many of us posting here would've witnessed them first-hand several times over due to our careers and hobbies, along with the alleged wolves and black panthers roaming the windbreaks between ag fields that characterize this region. And even in the case of a single person having exceptionally bad luck with regard to seeing cryptids in person, it doesn't near explain the dearth of accounts from our contemporaries and colleagues who also spend their lives outdoors.

In essence, to get to where Chris is at (taking his statements at face value) you not only have to believe the ridiculous notion that such a beast could exist and avoid detection all this time, but you also have to believe that everyone besides Chris and a few other 'knowers' in his region are either incompetent, too lazy, or too afraid to ever enter the woods and know for themselves. This list of lazy, cowardly incompetents would have to include professionals from multiple state and federal agencies, university biologists and researchers, professional wildlife photographers and videographers, full time hunting and fishing guides, and many others, yet Chris, somehow despite it all, sees bigfoots with with regularity. Oh, and he's got clear photos to prove it, but he'll only post the blurry ones.

That, actually, is probably a more ridiculous assertion than the idea of Bigfoot existing at all.
 
As far as the BLAARGing thing goes, who know?

Just to clarify on this point. I think it's also possible that BLAARGers believe--they either started that way or conned themselves-- but are also playing a game in their actions here pretending to beard the lion in its den, or as pretend researchers on their blogs or websites.
 
Last edited:
Heck, we even get close up video of a tsunami actually happening, and they're rarer than bigfeet, if one were to suspend reality and assume bigfeet exist in the first place.
 
As far as the BLAARGing thing goes, who knows? Chris might be one who actually believes the things he says (although I doubt it), but it's either that, or he's prone to whimsy and wrong. If seeing a BF were as simple as putting in time outdoors, many of us posting here would've witnessed them first-hand several times over due to our careers and hobbies, along with the alleged wolves and black panthers roaming the windbreaks between ag fields that characterize this region. And even in the case of a single person having exceptionally bad luck with regard to seeing cryptids in person, it doesn't near explain the dearth of accounts from our contemporaries and colleagues who also spend their lives outdoors.

In essence, to get to where Chris is at (taking his statements at face value) you not only have to believe the ridiculous notion that such a beast could exist and avoid detection all this time, but you also have to believe that everyone besides Chris and a few other 'knowers' in his region are either incompetent, too lazy, or too afraid to ever enter the woods and know for themselves. This list of lazy, cowardly incompetents would have to include professionals from multiple state and federal agencies, university biologists and researchers, professional wildlife photographers and videographers, full time hunting and fishing guides, and many others, yet Chris, somehow despite it all, sees bigfoots with with regularity. Oh, and he's got clear photos to prove it, but he'll only post the blurry ones.

That, actually, is probably a more ridiculous assertion than the idea of Bigfoot existing at all.
Bolded mine.
You've painted a picture of me that's a little shy of an accurate portrayal. Especially the bolded portion. Never at any time have I claimed to see these creatures regularly. The bulk of my sightings happened in 2010 and I have always been very clear about this.
These same areas still produce sighting reports regularly though. Although I have found sign, trackways, and other things since 2010, I've not had any visual sightings since then.

Also, your description of the reason other professionals have not found these creatures is a bit on the flawed side. Many have found them. I've taken sighting reports from every career field you mentioned (and still work with a few).

Now, to address the "in the woods" thing. I'm sure there are many people that have spent more time in the woods than I have. Why didn't/don't they find Bigfoot? My guess is they either weren't looking in a good area or they simply passed by them without noticing. We normally tend to overlook stuff if we're not looking for it in Nature. A twig snaps, we may stop and glance around briefly but when our eyes don't detect any movement the sound is quickly dismissed as nothing and we continue our activity/hike/whatever. Think about it. That's what we do as humans. But a 10 foot tall ape going unseen within visual range? Absolutely yes, it's what they do and they're very good at it. All they need do to fool your eye is to stop moving. Nothing supernatural about them, they're just very good at being elusive by blending in with their surroundings. Once you realize these things, and adjust your perception to not dismiss instantly, locating these creatures becomes much easier.
Chris B.
 
... But a 10 foot tall ape going unseen within visual range? Absolutely yes, it's what they do and they're very good at it. All they need do to fool your eye is to stop moving. Nothing supernatural about them, they're just very good at being elusive by blending in with their surroundings ...


Ok. But, why? They're 10 foot tall, freaking monster wood apes. Why the hell do they feel the need to play statues? What the hell? They're omnivores, predators. Who, or what, is gonna mess with them? If you're a 10 foot tall, 600 pound, flesh eating behemoth, I suspect such a beastie would be more inclined to advertise... unless he's planning to eat you... and I know they do that, Chris. They're blood thirsty. So why hasn't biggie chowed down on you? What's the story with the silly games? Is Bigfoot just messing with us? Is he a bit of a dick?
 
Ok. But, why? They're 10 foot tall, freaking monster wood apes. Why the hell do they feel the need to play statues? What the hell? They're omnivores, predators. Who, or what, is gonna mess with them? If you're a 10 foot tall, 600 pound, flesh eating behemoth, I suspect such a beastie would be more inclined to advertise... unless he's planning to eat you... and I know they do that, Chris. They're blood thirsty. So why hasn't biggie chowed down on you? What's the story with the silly games? Is Bigfoot just messing with us? Is he a bit of a dick?

The only possible explanation is that Chris is working with footie to get more of us into eating range.
 
So, we have breeding populations of >3-m tall bipedal apes living at areas with frequent human presence (hunters, loggers, trekkers, biologists, geologists, fishermen, wildlife enthusiasts of all sorts)... And these giant beasts just stand still and are not noticed by anyone and within visual range? Because people not looking for a giant ape won't notice it?

I remember UFOlogists bringing the same type of lame excuse when asked why astronomers do not see or take good pics of UFOs. "They are looking for something else".

Just the folks looking for bigfoot and which happen to have no good cameras at their hands or can't use a camera will find them. Oh, but these people can see shadows, fleeting glimpses, broken twigs, see "heads" through crappy thermal cameras, feel the ocassional small stuff (candies, pebbles and pinecones) being tossed, hear unidentified noises...

Oh, but they can shot crisp close-up pictures of bigfoot heads. But that's the seekrit good stuff, under analysis.

Stupid blind belief and/or tall tales.
 
Yellowstone NP, this was a hike to Heart Lake.
Something was throwing "rocks" into my camp and I will admit at first, I was saying to myself "no friggin way" but soon realized it was death from above courtesy of a squirrel.
He would snip them off and scurry down and gather them up.
http://youtu.be/DkRq50dXkwk
If only I had filmed it differently coulda had a little fun with it :)
 
Last edited:
Bolded mine.
You've painted a picture of me that's a little shy of an accurate portrayal. Especially the bolded portion. Never at any time have I claimed to see these creatures regularly. The bulk of my sightings happened in 2010 and I have always been very clear about this.
These same areas still produce sighting reports regularly though. Although I have found sign, trackways, and other things since 2010, I've not had any visual sightings since then.

Also, your description of the reason other professionals have not found these creatures is a bit on the flawed side. Many have found them. I've taken sighting reports from every career field you mentioned (and still work with a few).

Now, to address the "in the woods" thing. I'm sure there are many people that have spent more time in the woods than I have. Why didn't/don't they find Bigfoot? My guess is they either weren't looking in a good area or they simply passed by them without noticing. We normally tend to overlook stuff if we're not looking for it in Nature. A twig snaps, we may stop and glance around briefly but when our eyes don't detect any movement the sound is quickly dismissed as nothing and we continue our activity/hike/whatever. Think about it. That's what we do as humans. But a 10 foot tall ape going unseen within visual range? Absolutely yes, it's what they do and they're very good at it. All they need do to fool your eye is to stop moving. Nothing supernatural about them, they're just very good at being elusive by blending in with their surroundings. Once you realize these things, and adjust your perception to not dismiss instantly, locating these creatures becomes much easier.
Chris B.
The above is not reconcilable with reality.

Millions of hunters have spent billions of hours over the span of thousands of years looking for animals to harvest in every corner of the North American continent from the arctic islands to the Everglades. They took every type of game there is to take but not one bigfoot specimen because footie stood still until the danger passed?

Is this what passes for woodcraft and outdoor knowledge among proponents. Is this what you call being "educated on the subject?"

It's laughable.
 
Last edited:
The above is not reconcilable with reality.

Millions of hunters have spent billions of hours over the span of thousands of years looking for animals to harvest in every corner of the North American continent from the arctic islands to the Everglades. They took every type of game there is to take but not one bigfoot specimen because footie stood still until the danger passed?
Is this what passes for woodcraft and outdoor knowledge among proponents. Is this what you call being "educated on the subject?"

It's laughable.

That strategy doesn't work too well on big trucks.
 
You evaded detection by standing still.

Indeed. Our military abounds with people who have the technology and skill to escape detection.

The analogy fails, however, because those folks aren't quite so good at doing that when they're in the middle of dinner, or pooping, or having sex, or giving birth, or dying.

That's the implication of Chris' statement: Every bigfoot ever (well, all except Patty, of course) has been a master of disappearing by going motionless in a flash, no matter what it was doing right before the people showed up. They're so good at this that their poop even disappears when it stops moving, as do their bodies after they die. It's only the master woodsmen like himself and Daniel Boone who learn the secrets of shadow pareidolia that allow them to find the bigfoots!
 
Indeed. Our military abounds with people who have the technology and skill to escape detection.

The analogy fails, however, because those folks aren't quite so good at doing that when they're in the middle of dinner, or pooping, or having sex, or giving birth, or dying.

That's the implication of Chris' statement: Every bigfoot ever (well, all except Patty, of course) has been a master of disappearing by going motionless in a flash, no matter what it was doing right before the people showed up. They're so good at this that their poop even disappears when it stops moving, as do their bodies after they die. It's only the master woodsmen like himself and Daniel Boone who learn the secrets of shadow pareidolia that allow them to find the bigfoots!

Bigfoot is known to stink.

Stank.

Stunk.

Stench.

Motionless is no help when you stink really bad. A dog or a person will be able to walk right up to a giant stinking hulk.

They must always freeze when the wind is just right.
 
The above is not reconcilable with reality.

Millions of hunters have spent billions of hours over the span of thousands of years looking for animals to harvest in every corner of the North American continent from the arctic islands to the Everglades. They took every type of game there is to take but not one bigfoot specimen because footie stood still until the danger passed?

Is this what passes for woodcraft and outdoor knowledge among proponents. Is this what you call being "educated on the subject?"

It's laughable.

Are you arguing that no hunter has ever reported to have seen or took a shot at a Bigfoot?

One aspect of what I call being "educated on the subject" would require a study of legit sighting reports. A quick review would have already answered the argument you propose.

Hunters don't normally purposely shoot things walking on two legs. Of course there are many reports of hunting accidents every year with hunters being shot and killed accidentally. But how many hunters are purposely/intently killed? A few? Any?

Anyway, if you'll do the research you'll find the hunter reports/stories usually end up with "It looked too much like a man to shoot it." Or the hunter was afraid someone may have been playing a joke and didn't want to risk the chance of killing someone over stupidity.

Another aspect of what I call being "educated on the subject" would be trying to find the answer to how they have remained under the radar as long as they have. Now of course one could take the easy route and say "it's because they don't exist" but that is not the answer as they certainly do exist. So we have to get away from the quick dismissal frame of mind and try to determine how they evade detection. The answer is they're elusive, and they're very good at it. More study and application of "woodsmanship" would be useful when trying to determine how they do what they do and that's yet another aspect.
Chris B.


Bigfoot is known to stink.

Stank.

Stunk.

Stench.

Motionless is no help when you stink really bad. A dog or a person will be able to walk right up to a giant stinking hulk.

They must always freeze when the wind is just right.

Not all sightings report an odor. A little homework sinks this argument quickly.
Chris B.
 
Not all sightings report an odor. A little homework sinks this argument quickly.
Chris B.

Actually, the varying descriptions of bigfoot are well known. So much so that one wonders how many varieties there are supposed to be.

Did you miss my "grinch" reference entirely, or what?

Or did you lose your sense of humor about bigfoot?

Pheromones and stench are, nevertheless, a large part of bigfoot lore.
 
LTC8K6, the grinch reference must have been in a different thread. I missed it I guess.

I do agree that reports of odors with sightings are common, but there are also many reports/encounters listed without any odor mentioned as well. So, for them to be given away by their smell won't work for every encounter, only some.

Of course not every foul odor in Nature is Bigfoot, but I have spoken with several hunters who have absolutely no belief in these creatures whatsoever and many report to have smelled something dead or foul/rotten in an area without finding any obvious source of the smell (deer carcass etc.)
Chris B.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom