Why wouldn't bigfoot hunt humans?

Status
Not open for further replies.
OntarioSquatch said:
Usually it's not a joke though; it's an attempt to get attention or promote a scam or both.
Click to expand...
How can it bring attention or money when the BFRO sighting reports (many thousands) are anonymous? How can a person who finds a giant footprint get much attention or money? Nearly all hoaxes seem to be worthless for fame or cash. It's like something else is going on with hoaxes. Hundreds of YouTube fake Bigfoots and not a dime earned from them. All of it given away for free.

Can you explain?
 
William Parcher said:
How can it bring attention or money when the BFRO sighting reports (many thousands) are anonymous? How can a person who finds a giant footprint get much attention or money? Nearly all hoaxes seem to be worthless for fame or cash. It's like something else is going on with hoaxes. Hundreds of YouTube fake Bigfoots and not a dime earned from them. All of it given away for free.

Can you explain?
Click to expand...

Anonymous reports don't seem to have much joke value, which raises questions about the tens of thousands of reports that have been sumitted. I know I've already said this, but I think most of the published reports on the BFRO are from people who actually experienced something that they can't easily explain, much like chupacabra sightings (except that turned out to be coyotes with mange). I'm willing to look at databases for santa claus, fairies and dragons for a comparison with the reports coming in for Bigfoot as that might provide some insight, but it seems to be just UFO's and Bigfoot that people are reporting in detail and regularity.

Why are there so many detailed reports of Bigfoot and why are they not spread out evenly like they should be throughout the continent and time of year?

ETA: with youtube I think people enjoy getting views on their videos. Bigfoot hoaxes are a good way for people to get views, so I guess that would count as trying to get attention.
 
Last edited:
OntarioSquatch said:
I know I've already said this, but I think most of the published reports on the BFRO are from people who actually experienced something that they can't easily explain
Click to expand...
Q1: Then why do they submit their unexplainable report to a Bigfoot organization website if they don't know WTF they saw? That makes no sense. It's like they already know that it is a Bigfoot story.

Q2: Why does it always look like the Bigfoot denialists have all the knowledge and wisdom and the believers do not?
 
William Parcher said:
Q1: Then why do they submit their unexplainable report to a Bigfoot organization website if they don't know WTF they saw? That makes no sense. It's like they already know that it is a Bigfoot story.

Q2: Why does it always look like the Bigfoot denialists have all the knowledge and wisdom and the believers do not?
Click to expand...

It's easy to say that Bigfoot doesn't exist because of a lack of _____ and it'll sound both logical and reasonable. Footers usually have no idea what they are talking about, but I can't really blame them because they are trying to figure out a phenomenon that is more complex than they realize.

To answer the first question, a lot of reports don't involve any clear visual of the animal. A lot are brief glimpses of something that matches the description of Bigfoot. These reports often include things like strange tracks being found or rocks being thrown. Bigfoot is one explanation that a person may consider.
 
LOL. It's special pleading on steroids. Have a look at OS' signature link and tell me the difference between that and Christian apologetics.
 
William Parcher said:
Except for when they say that Bigfoot exists, and then they know 100% of what they are talking about, right? That's what really matters after all, right?
Click to expand...

I don't think that's all that matters because what is the point of believing they exist, but not knowing anything else about them? The animal could provide good insight on the history of human evolution.
 
OntarioSquatch said:
I don't think that's all that matters because what is the point of believing they exist, but not knowing anything else about them? The animal could provide good insight on the history of human evolution.
Click to expand...
Why would all the hillbilly creationists who have seen Bigfoot care about that at all?
 
I don't know, but I think it's a fascinating topic for many. Who doesn't like the idea of an 8 foot tall pig-tossing Sasquatch that lives in the forest?
 
Based on everything I've learned up until now, I think these animals are afraid of humans. But then again, if one of them wanted to hunt down a human, they could easily do so and there wouldn't be any evidence for it. This is one reason for why I think the species needs to be proven. The public deserves to know about what they could come across while out in the wilderness.
 
OntarioSquatch said:
if one of them wanted to hunt down a human, they could easily do so and there wouldn't be any evidence for it.
Click to expand...
If you and I are in the Ontario woods and Bigfoot grabs, kills and eats you, I can then tell the police that Bigfoot killed and ate you. There should be evidence of that to find and gather. Why do you say that there would be no evidence? I mean, I'm still trying to wrap my mind around Bigfoot believers not having this kind of common sense.
 
Over 99% of people who go missing while out in the wilderness were either out alone or were separated from a group. Just walking in pairs is enough to pretty much guarantee a person's safety.

In other words, if Bigfoot is real and it hunts humans, its attacks are on lone hikers.
 
Last edited:
Why do bears and tigers kill and eat people who hike in pairs? They sometimes eat both people. They attack and eat people who are sleeping in groups too. Is this because they just don't give a damn, while Bigfoot really does give a damn?
 
The number of fatal bear attacks that occur across the entire continent each year is less than a dozen. I think it's something the media has caused people to be afraid of.
 
Sorry. I misread your post. I think Bigfoot and bears would have two very different ways of behaving. In other words, what a bear does may not be what a Bigfoot does.
 
OntarioSquatch said:
I don't think that's all that matters because what is the point of believing they exist, but not knowing anything else about them? The animal could provide good insight on the history of human evolution.
Click to expand...
Like in a conversation?
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom