Merged Bigfoot follies

[comncents]

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.

I think I understand now. Footies are all over the woods, but they are so good at standing still most people don’t see them. You have to develop your Bigfoot Zen like Chris, Standing, Smeja, Carter, Roe, Patterson and Daniel Boone and only then will you be able to get a full 1080p HD facial at 15ft of a Bigfoot. Of course, when you reach the level of Bigfoot Zen required, you will have no desire to show the picture to anyone. You have to adjust your brain to Bigfoot Feng Shui.

I also wonder how many Bigfoot believers get involved in Multi-Level Marketing Programs?

 

[GT/CS]

I think the whole, bigfoots-are-difficult-to-see idea came from the final scene in Harry and the Hendersons, where many 'foots appear from the forest. The illusion was well done and probably convinced some people that hiding in plain sight is possible.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PJkmvYEqRVE

 

[HarryHenderson]

Which points out the deeper problem of Bigfoot's metamorphosis. Going from a big, hairy, smelly beast (say PGF) to an entity that might still "look" like that, but possesses so much more ability and power than that film could have possibly portrayed. That is, Patty is even more remarkable for things you can't see than the ones you (seemingly) can. She was dehydrated that day.

It's already been proven scientifically by Don "The Snake" Meldrum himself that Bigfoot has pets. Can you see Patty with a parakeet and a poodle? And Bigfoot runs 60MPH. Did you know that? They actually jump from car roof to car roof on freeways so you never really see them when they're crossing one. They use the back of pickups for cat naps. They also have the uncanny ability to physically avoid the surrounding area of anything that has or involves a "camera lens". Yet not think twice about it when it's just a "microphone". And now they have chameleon-like stealth so as to be completely undetectable in plain sight? Wait, that sounds like a myth now.

 

[Northern Lights]

Do you not understand which forum you are on?

Yeah, my bad.

 

[CORed]

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.

I can think of one type of wild animal whose primary survival tactic is to hold really still and hope they are not seen. That would be grouse, of several species. In spite of this, I have seen many grouse, of several species, and hunters regularly kill them. One of my dogs came very close to catching a grouse that repeatedly tried this tactic with a remarkable lack of success . It's not bad as a plan A, but this particular grouse's plan B was to fly 10 feet and repeat plan A, which didn't fool the dog at all. The grouse managed to survive by invoking plan C (fly farther away), but was almost too late in doing so.

The "hold really still and hope nothing sees me" tactic does work well enough for grouse to keep them from going extinct, but it's far from perfect. It seems to be a much better survival plan for a bird that weighs a few pounds than a 10 foot tall ape man. Bigfoot must be really, really good at it, and it still doesn't explain the lack of dead ones, or of other physical evidence.

 

[Kilaak Kommander]

Question for you. Is there anyone you know personally that you would take at their word if something extraordinary happened to them and they told you about it. No other evidence, just their word. Maybe your mother, a best friend, clergy, surgeon general, anyone?

There are many people I would take at their word if they told me they saw a large animal in the woods that they were unable to identify.

If they told me it was absolutely, unquestionably a Bigfoot I would not believe them, simply because they have no point of reference. They have never seen a Bigfoot in captivity, nor a preserved specimen on display. They have never seen a clear, unambiguous photo. Even the descriptions of eyewitnesses vary wildly. How can you absolutely identify something you've never seen before?

 

[CORed]

Hell if I personally saw a figboot I'd probably think the more likely explanation was that I was somehow mistaken given the absolute unlikeness of one existing.

Absolutely. I once thought I saw a flying saucer (I watched long enough to figure out that it was a short contrail, tapered on both ends, reflecting sunlight while I was in twilight, but at first glance, it appeared to be polished metal, or something else highly reflective).

A hallmark of believers in all sorts of woo is to put way to much faith in human perception, whether their own or that of a witness. A witness can misperceive something they saw, without being a liar or mentally ill. This applies to yourself, your mother, priests, ministers, police officers, and total strangers.

If the witness thinks they saw a bigfoot, alien spacecraft, unicorn, dragon or mermaid, they are almost certainly mistaken.

"I know what I saw" is not the least bit convincing to me.

 

[Resume]

I can think of one type of wild animal whose primary survival tactic is to hold really still and hope they are not seen. That would be grouse, of several species. In spite of this, I have seen many grouse, of several species, and hunters regularly kill them.

Snowshoe hare like to do this as well. Lying in form, they are difficult to spot until you see a black nose or eye; then it's hasenpfeffer and fly-tying material.

Human beings are good at it too, up in tree blinds, down in ground blinds, behind a cairn of boulders out on the tundra waiting for tukto, or pressure ridges on the ice hoping for Nanuk or Nattiq. Yep, humans beings, being still, accounted for billions of game animals from small to large . . . except for footie. Not a rare occurrence, or a few here and there but not a single example anywhere.

Maybe they're inbisible as my daughters used to say.

 

[comncents]

My New Year's resolution is to quit feeding the BLAARGers.
No more presenting logical, rational reasons to people who tell Footie stories. Arguing about stick structures, NA legends, "wilderness expeditions", sightings reports and all the special excuses for why the Big Guy hasn't been "proved" yet. No more asking how footie carried a Good-n-plenty around all day before making a perfectly placed toss or why someone with a perfect HD photo won't show it.

and I'm going to lose some weight - I promise.

 

[ChrisBFRPKY]

Chris, it is posts like this that frustrate me when discussing this with you. You try to slip in little things like "legit" sighting reports, and statements like bigfoot certainly do exist. There is no such thing as a legit sighting report and bigfoots most certainly do not exist. Now if you have strong evidence to the contrary, i.e. more than anecdotes and leaves, then please present that evidence. Otherwise, I have no wish to grant you your premise and engage in fanciful discussion like how does bigfoot evade detection. That is nonsense. That is playing the BLAARG with you. That conversation is essentially fleshing out a bestiary entry for an imaginary animal. Game play, nothing more.

No, your premise is not granted and you will need to do more than just assert that bigfoot exists before we can get anywhere near a conversation mulling over alleged footie traits.

Well, one thing's for certain. One of us is wrong. Chris B.

 

[William Parcher]

Well, one thing's for certain. One of us is wrong.

If one of your positions is unfalsifiable, then that position cannot ever be shown to be wrong - even if it is wrong.

 

[Gilbert Syndrome]

Well, one thing's for certain. One of us is wrong. Chris B.

Yep, you.

Next...

 

[William Parcher]

A related question for me is why we don't have Bigfoot in Mexico. It's interesting that Bigfootery essentially stops at the USA/Mexico border...

Breaking News: We have Bigfoot in Mexico.

Well, maybe they should be called Clawfoot.

The Popocatepetl volcano in Mexico isn’t usually known for its Bigfoot sightings. There’s been plenty of “paranormal” stuff there such as unidentified objects floating around the volcano, but no giant beings — until now. One of the most hair-raising story to come from that area is a footage of what a mountain rescue crew claims to be giant beings. The rescuers explained how they’d witnessed the creatures climbing up slopes at super-human speeds. The subjects in the footage appear to be brown in color, and very thin. According to the witnesses, they were not wearing any visible clothing:

"Once, we saw one of these individuals climb up the glacier in 10 minutes, a stretch that we linger about 3-4 hours to go. They have an amazing agility."

Among other things they’ve witnessed were giant footprints:

"His footprints are very large, the part corresponding to heel leaves a hole, something that resembles a claw which apparently serves them – like a propulsive support – in these dislocations impressive through the snow and ice."

In a recent interview on Tercermilenio television, climber Guillermo Vidales, said that mountain rescue crews on Popocatepetl saw humanoid creatures measuring about 2.5 meters (8.2 feet) in height.

 

[Stuart]

Personally I find it hard to conceive that such a large being eludes any reasonable attempt to being photographed.
this is proof that man is discovering new species and accurately recording it.
I can't understand if these guys can do it - why can't someone trying to find a bigfoot?

 

[Resume]

Personally I find it hard to conceive that such a large being eludes any reasonable attempt to being photographed.
this is proof that man is discovering new species and accurately recording it.
I can't understand if these guys can do it - why can't someone trying to find a bigfoot?

According to some, you have to be looking for a 9ft, 600lb monkey in order to find it. Except for those "thousands" of reports from people who weren't.

In footery, you can say the silliest things.

 

[Biscuit]

According to some, you have to be looking for a 9ft, 600lb monkey in order to find it. Except for those "thousands" of reports from people who weren't.

In footery, you can say the silliest things.

If we can't see them because they are standing still then how come I can see trees?

 

[Correa Neto]

' Cause trees don't mind been seen!
DUH!

 

[tsig]

If we can't see them because they are standing still then how come I can see trees?

A standing footie looks just like a tree.

Be careful that next oak you see could be a footie.

 

[LTC8K6]

Trees are not naturally blurry like bigfoot.

 

[William Parcher]

A Bigfoot that stands still is going to look exactly like a Bigfoot that isn't moving.