Simple Challenge For Bigfoot Supporters

[LAL]

I certainly does seem to be mixed up. The Giganto mandibles are clearly 'V' shaped. However, I don't think 'V' shaped and the paraboloid given for humans are synonymous.

Oddly, I now find myself wondering if the reduction of canine and incisor teeth in humans is a reflection of the use of stone tools for the cutting of meat then what is supposed to account for the reduction of Giganto's canines?

I don't think the reduction in Homo had anything to do with stone tools. It was present in all bipedal primates that I know of, even Oreopithecus.

http://www.geo.unifi.it/ricerca/pdf & download per web oreo/Alba et al 2001.pdf

Krantz said there was a problem with occlusion (of the fangs) in an upright posture, but he didn't really elaborate.

 

[Huntster]

But the initial funded search was already based on secondary evidence (something other than biological material) that could be discounted as possibly hoaxed, right? Why launch the search in the first place if hoaxable stuff is not considered as being meaningful?

To learn the truth.

The whole point of hoaxing is to try to convince the world that Bigfoot exists, even if one can never be found to give physical confirmation.

And the whole point in discovery is to confirm the truth.

We can't get there if we don't look for it.

What if somebody creates a fake trackway a day in advance of the funded researchers' arrival?

A proper investigation will eventually determine the truth.

What if a funded researcher claimed that a 10 foot tall Bigfoot suddenly charged him from close range and it was so fast and terrifying that he couldn't get his finger on the record button of his camera?

We have more testimony and a lack of photographic evidence.

What good is peer review for these kinds of secondary evidence?

The same as with primary evidence.

Who are the peers that do the reviewing?

Damned good question. I'd like an answer to that one myself.

You'd need at least one of those "Bigfoot Experts" on the peer review board, right?

The best experts available.

And who is that?

The funded search would already be predicated upon believers convincing agencies that the existing secondary evidence fully justifies the endeavor.

So is that why we haven't received radio signals via SETI as of yet?

If the funder points out that "peer review" (it generally exists outside of professional science publication) has already brought out skepticism and claims of hoaxery - then the proponents must insist that the negative reviews are somehow invalid towards rejecting the project.

An "official" review is "peer reviewed" by the courts.

It's legal, official, and permanent unless further evidence is available (and maybe not even then............)

I think that the only hope for a big funded search would have to come from private enterprise that is already predisposed to Bigfoot existing.

We've had that. It ain't cutting it.

First, that "private enterprise" is "enterprising", and that in itself is a source of ordnance for the denialists.

Secondly, that "private enterprise" has no authority whatsoever (legal, scientific, or otherwise) to determine anything that is potentially this important.

Thirdly, that "private enterprise" is under no oversight whatsoever.

Catch the clue..........

Many are going to be looking for a return on investment.

Official agencies (charged with management, anyway) aren't supposed to be looking for a "return on investment."

 

[Huntster]

I give up... why? Is it because they want to become millionaires instead of someone else?

Why are you so focused on who gets the money?

The goal is to buy the truth.

Hopefully, we can buy it from folks that can produce it, not fund those who will abuse it.

Huntster suggested a rapid response team as part of the funded search which would quickly survey an area that had a sighting. A hoaxer could lure the team like mice to cheese. Make a fake trackway, call in a sighting in the vicinity and sit back as the task force goes into action. Hot diggety!

So how do they profit?

Like those who phone in bomb threats?

 

[Huntster]

Didn't that already happen in Bossburg, ca. 1969-1970?

Did it?

 

[Huntster]

Just like a panda's dentition is reduced relative to a grizzly's, so too is Gigantopithecus's dentition reduced relative to an orangutan. Ditto the narrow front of the jaw. Same as in a panda.

Are pandas part time scavangers? Are they part time predators? Do they gorge on fresh anadromous fish?

Did Giganto?

No one would seriously argue that pandas are bipedal though...

"Science" didn't even know about pandas until recently:

The giant panda remained unknown to Westerners until 1869 when native hunters brought French missionary Armand David a dead specimen. He sent the pelt back to the Museum of Natural History in Paris. German zoologist Hugo Weigold was the first Westerner to observe a live giant panda in the wild. In 1929 Theodore and Kermit Roosevelt (sons of former U. S. President Theodore Roosevelt) became the first Westerners to hunt and kill a giant panda. It was not until 1937 that Ruth Harkness and Gerald Russell captured a live giant panda for the first time. It took sixty-seven years from the time of the giant panda's discovery by Westerners until its live capture.

So much for "peer" review..............

 

[Huntster]

So with the holidays over, I've been pondering how nice it'd be to have a few extra bucks in the bank. Does anyone remember John Green's challenge to the world that he'd pay $10,000.00 to anyone who could reproduce X-hundred BF tracks in a dusty road within a couple of hours?

Nope.

Gotta link?

As I recall, the most impressive thing to Green was the depth of the tracks he'd seen, yet photos I've seen of the 1967 Bluff Creek prints alongside bootprints show them being about the same depth.

Is that all you remember?

Is that challenge still open?

I don't know. Where was it published.

Wanna' conspire?

And if so, who exactly is going to evaluate the tracks? Green himself?

"Peer review"?

Oh oh..............

Possibly another Bigfoot "expert"?

Crap.

"Peer review".

I'm also curious about who's coughing up the 10 grand.

Maybe the same guy who is gonna pay "millions" for a carcass?

If anyone knows more of this, maybe yuo could enlighten the forum?

Yeah.

What he said...........

 

[Huntster]

A funded search for Bigfoot will of course be preceded by a funder agreeing that the already presented secondary evidence justifies the project. If they hesitate, one might want to raise the issue of public safety.

You're willing to use the "public safety" BS, but ignore the wildlife management responsibility?

Bigfoot is not generally regarded as dangerous to people, but unless these claimants were spectacularly wrong or lying... Bigfoot is potentially very dangerous. Should the funded trackers wear helmets in anticipation of big flying rocks?

How about if they just get their asses into the field and find out if helmets are needed?

 

[Huntster]

First let's figure out if anyone claiming to be a Bigfoot tracker can actually discern between "real" and forged prints. Then we can get into whether they need helmets, or knee pads, or full-body condoms, etc.

Why don't you go along to let them know?

You're obviously interested enough to publish regarding the Skookum Cast.

What's more, you're clearly qualified if your "peers" are willing to review your work.

 

[Huntster]

...I think Huntster is saying that society needs to show maturity by putting those questions aside and just getting on with the hunt....

Am I wrong?

Time's a wastin' in the quest to understand and (possibly) protect this majestic creature (stink and all).

Am I wrong?

When the trackers find whopper tracks they can't waste time convening some peer review to determine if they are real. The trail grows colder with each passing minute. The whole operation is based on rapid response as a key to confirmation.

Maybe.

When the trackers find footprints, somebody(s) has to hurry forwards to catch BF even before a determination can be made on the prints.

Isn't that what many have been saying regarding Patterson/Gimlin and the cast of Skookum casters?

A guy(s) stays behind to poke around the found prints and if he decides they are fake he radios the active tracker to call it off. "Code Mickeytoodle! Yep Bart, you can stop your stalking and come on back to Base 9. Over."

Not "a guy".

Guys. Equipped. Ready. Willing. Full time. Paid.

And (BTW) your radio discipline sucks.

Later on during the daily debriefing....

"I sure wish we would get us a Bigfoot. I'm starting to get disillusioned."
"Keep your chin up, Bart. Remember what the boss said yesterday... You can't be skeptical and catch a Bigfoot all in the same day."

It would be nice if such a conversation happened.

Alas, it hasn't.

There has been no official debriefing regarding sasquatchery (that we know of).

Why?

Because there has been no official effort to find a sasquatch, despite the fact that if sasquatches exist (which there is evidence to suggest that there are), an official effort to determine their health as a species is an official responsibility of the USFWS.

 

[Huntster]

Originally Posted by LAL
To prevent anyone from laying down phony evidence and then claiming hoax.

They should already know the difference between something real and a hoax.

Yeah. So should you.

You claim intelligence, but you debate otherwise.

After all, if they are researching a "hotspot" they have already determined that the secondary evidence that sent them there was legit, right? Are these guys weak at spotting hoaxes?

What "guys"?

Quote:
Who's going to make any of them millionaires?

Maybe the McDonald's Corporation.

You're in the wrong debate here, Ronald.

Go get a burger. Ask for pickles.

 

[Skeptical Greg]

It's $100,000, not $10,000. The challenge still stands as far as I know. It's through the The Willow Creek-China Flat Museum.

http://home.clara.net/rfthomas/news/reward.html

If Green's "coughing it up", like Randi's, his money has never been safer.

Page 16, The Best of Sasquatch Bigfoot:

Yeah right!!

A Bigfoot couldn't win that 100 grand...

It's like the Pope offering a reward to prove there is no God, and getting to
be the judge too.

 

[Huntster]

....It's like the Pope offering a reward to prove there is no God, and getting to be the judge too.

"Peer review".

You guys do it, too.

Get the clue...............

 

[LAL]

In Alaska, the "ferocious" coastal brown bear is primarily a grazer and fish eater.

I wonder if "Ciochon and colleagues" could have gotten that right with a mere dental examination.

Mountain Lions eat grasshoppers in season when they can't make a kill. How much tooth wear would grasshoppers cause? It took studies of stomach contents to discover this.

 

[Huntster]

Originally Posted by Huntster
In Alaska, the "ferocious" coastal brown bear is primarily a grazer and fish eater.

I wonder if "Ciochon and colleagues" could have gotten that right with a mere dental examination.

Mountain Lions eat grasshoppers in season when they can't make a kill.

Grasshoppers are damned good in any season.

How much tooth wear would grasshoppers cause?

None.

They provide much more nourishment than they require in hunting.

It took studies of stomach contents to discover this.

Was it "peer reviewed"?

 

[carcharodon]

So with the holidays over, I've been pondering how nice it'd be to have a few extra bucks in the bank. Does anyone remember John Green's challenge to the world that he'd pay $10,000.00 to anyone who could reproduce X-hundred BF tracks in a dusty road within a couple of hours? As I recall, the most impressive thing to Green was the depth of the tracks he'd seen, yet photos I've seen of the 1967 Bluff Creek prints alongside bootprints show them being about the same depth. Is that challenge still open? And if so, who exactly is going to evaluate the tracks? Green himself? Possibly another Bigfoot "expert"? I'm also curious about who's coughing up the 10 grand. If anyone knows more of this, maybe yuo could enlighten the forum?

Off you go then Desert Yeti. Let's see what you can come up with. Seeing as the reward is $100,000 it should be even more of an incentive for you to get that brain of yours a 'ticking.

Once you have pondered everything, done your tests and trial runs and are satisfied yourself, it should be easy to pronounce your capabilities to this forum or the BFF or anywhere else. You'd for sure get a lot of interested parties wanting to see what you come up with. You never know, you might get yourself a whole bunch of people impressed with your work. It might embarrass the Willow Creek Museum into paying out. At the very least it might create such as stink as to finally have given even the most ardent proponents food for thought. One thing is for sure, you will get yourself a hell of a lot of attention in the 'bigfoot communty' if you give it a good go. Not all are one eyed. Remember Steenburg and Mathews with their recent debunking of certain purported sasquatch sounds??

Seeing as the man made ape suits aren't doing the trick of convincing proponents the PGF was a hoax as they are so poor, maybe you can take the lead with your complex trackways??

Talk is cheap. I hope you aren't going to go the Dfoot way and talk and talk and talk.....and come up with zilch. I do hope you consider this carefully.

$100,000 is the bait. Hey, maybe you and a whole bunch of scoftics can team up (mass brainwork an' all that) and embarrass the Willow Creek Museum? What do you say? Would be a hoot wouldn't it?

 

[William Parcher]

The fact that the Skookum Expedition location was top secret helped rule out the possibility of a hoaxed imprint (8', not 9', in that case).

I'm not suggesting the SC is faked, but put that aside for a moment. Having a secret location for an expedition party does not rule out hoaxery from within.

Peter Byrne once discovered miles of trackway in snow when he himself didn't know where he was going. How would a hoaxer have known where to put them, assuming such trackways can be faked in the first place?

How were we able to rule out Byrne as the hoaxer? Is there any evidence that the trackway did go for miles - or is it just from his testimony?

He's dead.

Then Freeman won't be cashing any check from National Geographic for his story of bagging a biggie.

 

[LAL]

I'm not suggesting the SC is faked, but put that aside for a moment. Having a secret location for an expedition party does not rule out hoaxery from within.

Imagine, if you will, the difficulty of trying to fake an imprint so large it took over 200 lbs. of Hydrocal to cast it under the noses of a dozen honest expedition members.

How were we able to rule out Byrne as the hoaxer? Is there any evidence that the trackway did go for miles - or is it just from his testimony?

Personal conversation. There are plenty of other trackways in snow that have been photographed. (Friends of mine followed a double trackway for 7 miles with the Columbian camera crew.)

I doubt this witness knew where he was going either.

http://www.bigfootencounters.com/images/JimKarl.htm

Then Freeman won't be cashing any check from National Geographic for his story of bagging a biggie.

That you didn't know he died shows how little you back up your assumptions.

 

[Skeptical Greg]

$100,000 is the bait. Hey, maybe you and a whole bunch of scoftics can team up (mass brainwork an' all that) and embarrass the Willow Creek Museum? What do you say? Would be a hoot wouldn't it?

Is there an actual copy of that challenge we can read somewhere ?

I had a link but it is dead now ...

No, no one is going to collect that $100,000 dollars ..

If everyone can actually read the document, they will see why ...

It works like this..

People who believe Bigfoot prints are real, will dictate the conditions under which someone will try to fool them.

They will know in advance that you are making fake prints, then they will decide if you have fooled them or not ...

Surely you understand there is a problem with that ? Or, do you ?

 

[William Parcher]

To learn the truth.

The search may provide some "truths", but not all possible ones. It couldn't really provide a truth that Bigfoot does not exist.

And the whole point in discovery is to confirm the truth. We can't get there if we don't look for it.

We can't show that BF does not exist, even if we go looking for it.

A proper investigation will eventually determine the truth.

...and I think a bullet or truck grill should have already determined the truth by now.

William Parcher: I think that the only hope for a big funded search would have to come from private enterprise that is already predisposed to Bigfoot existing.

Huntster: We've had that. It ain't cutting it.

First, that "private enterprise" is "enterprising", and that in itself is a source of ordnance for the denialists.

Secondly, that "private enterprise" has no authority whatsoever (legal, scientific, or otherwise) to determine anything that is potentially this important.

Thirdly, that "private enterprise" is under no oversight whatsoever.

Catch the clue..........

I think that the enterprising nature of private enterprises is what would produce the best results. That enterprise can list cash, fame and scientific history-making as its rewards after a confirmation. They can decide themselves the ranking of the importance of those rewards, but nonetheless they will get all three.

That enterprise probably wouldn't be the authority to make the meaningful scientific evaluations of the body. I do doubt that the enterprise itself would have any trouble determining that the 9 foot ape carcass in their truck is "that Bigfoot thing that everyone has been talking about". The scientists will later tell you where it seems to fit in the evolutionary scheme. Wouldn't it be funky if they decided it is not a primate, but is instead a descendant of dinosaurs that is exhibiting evolutionary convergence with modern apes? It looks just like a primate and a mammal, but it's not

Me: Many are going to be looking for a return on investment.

You: Official agencies (charged with management, anyway) aren't supposed to be looking for a "return on investment."

I'm assuming you mean government agencies. Their return doesn't have to be monetary. They would be looking for a return that represents global cultural enrichment that comes from an increasing knowledge of the natural world. If they put the body on display in a national museum and charge admission - they could possibly recoup search costs.

 

[desertyeti]

Is there an actual copy of that challenge we can read somewhere ?

I had a link but it is dead now ...

No, no one is going to collect that $100,000 dollars ..

If everyone can actually read the document, they will see why ...

It works like this..

People who believe Bigfoot prints are real, will dictate the conditions under which someone will try to fool them.

They will know in advance that you are making fake prints, then they will decide if you have fooled them or not ...

Surely you understand there is a problem with that ? Or, do you ?

Yep...loophole big enough to drive Oprah through.
That's why I'm going to see if any of the BF "trackers" or whatever they call themselves would be willing to look at some real and some fake human and animal track casts. I'm planning on a series of 12 casts for starters:
1) 2 real and 2 forged (made from a wooden or resin sculpture) human footprint casts.
2) 2 real and 2 forged bear tracks.
3) 2 real and 2 forged primate tracks (species to be determined based on availability).
Hey..it's a start at quantifying the skills of these so-called BF-"trackers."