Simple Challenge For Bigfoot Supporters

[Mad Hom]

But everything's inconclusive until the requisite number of specimens have been brought in for the new species to be identified, and then the textbooks will have to be revised.

And life will go on.

Yeah....keep clicking your heels Wu.

 

[Mad Hom]

This is just more disingenuousness on her part, mad hom. We've had plenty of discussions on how to hoax tracks, including how to make it look like a sasquatch stepped over a high fence, etc.

More bafflegab.

Next she'll trot out the stilts, or the giant wheel with feet attached, etc. Ridiculous claptrap that no decent hoaxer would ever resort to.

A child can figure out how to leave sasquatch tracks without leaving any of their own. A child can figure out how to put a left footprint on one side of a fence and a right footprint on the other side. Only a dishonest person would act like that is some kind of miracle feat, imo.

These are exactly the things that a hoaxer would do just to make the tracks seem legit. It's called thinking. It doesn't even take much of that, either.

Wow! Look at the fresh tracks going right across the fence! It stepped over this high fence that I can't step over! Must be real tracks, then.....

Humans can't make those crop circles overnight either.....

I'm just mystified why Bigfoot Fan thinks that anything that they deem to be unhoaxable is beyond human ingenuity to pull off. It's as if they feel that they can't be fooled....kind of like Pope Krantz.

 

[LAL]

I have no way of proving it...nor am I stating it as absolute fact...just thought I'd share my purely speculative theory.

I'm glad you realize it's purely speculative. I'm sure you are aware there were hoaxes long before there was a BFF. Personally, I don't understand why teenaged boys (it usually is - some are overgrown) can't find something better to do than waste the time and money of serious investigators by sending clutzy home movies and making phone calls, but maybe it has to do with a lack of teenaged girls in their lives.

Pure speculation on my part, of course.

 

[kitakaze]

Thanks for keeping the ball rolling, LAL, but don't forget you're supposed to ask me one hopefully short and simple question as a skeptic, too.

The 7-mile double trackway above Carson, Washington, another trackway in snow across a farm near The Dalles, Oregon, that was investigated and photographed by deputies but not, to my knowlege, publicized, Tollgate, the Cox sighting, which wasn't extraordinary but which was backed up by evidence that showed the animal did exactly what the witness said it did, everything Bob Titmus found and so on. I would also include hairs that match each other, but no known animal. At least one of these was embedded in the Skookum Cast. It did not come from Dr. Sarmiento's head.

Because of the focus on the "best evidence", and the efforts to debunk it, there is much that just seems to be unknown even to people who've looked into it somewhat.

OK, Carson trackway, near The Dalles trackway, everything Titmus found, and hairs that match eachother. If I may, I'm interpreting this as being what you consider persuasive based primarily on it's quality and supported by it's quantity.

Do you think in any of the cases you sight (including what I didn't quote) a cause other than sasquatch has been satisfactorily ruled out?

BTW, don't forget to have question for me and that the overall theme is short and simple. I say that as it's far to easy to exceed the scope/parameters of the discussion and to quickly begin to have far too many questions.

 

[Mad Hom]

I'm glad you realize it's purely speculative. I'm sure you are aware there were hoaxes long before there was a BFF. Personally, I don't understand why teenaged boys (it usually is - some are overgrown) can't find something better to do than waste the time and money of serious investigators by sending clutzy home movies and making phone calls, but maybe it has to do with a lack of teenaged girls in their lives.

Pure speculation on my part, of course.

I am well aware of that Wu...as a matter of fact pretty much everything that happened up to and after the Think Tank came into being probably was/is...but once again I'm just speculating.

You also bring up another ploy Bigfoot fan uses that just chaps my hide.

They don't have anything better to do. Teenage boys/overgrown teenagers.

Wu maybe it's just a hobby of theirs...you know...pulling the wool over the eyes of Tru Bleever.

 

[LAL]

Thanks for keeping the ball rolling, LAL, but don't forget you're supposed to ask me one hopefully short and simple question as a skeptic, too.

Such as? How about, "Why are some of the lame explain-aways presented by some denialists so readily accepted by other denialists?"

OK, Carson trackway, near The Dalles trackway, everything Titmus found, and hairs that match eachother. If I may, I'm interpreting this as being what you consider persuasive based primarily on it's quality and supported by it's quantity.

Do you think in any of the cases you sight (including what I didn't quote) a cause other than sasquatch has been satisfactorily ruled out?

Yes.

BTW, don't forget to have question for me and that the overall theme is short and simple. I say that as it's far to easy to exceed the scope/parameters of the discussion and to quickly begin to have far too many questions.

I think we have far too many onlookers sniping from the sidelines, and not just on this board.

I'm curious about which member of BFF copped wolftrax' digital rendering from the Members' Lounge so it could be laughed at here. I don't suppose you could help me out with that one, though. I actually sent him an apology for my comment last night. What's gotten into me?

 

[LAL]

You also bring up another ploy Bigfoot fan uses that just chaps my hide.

???????? Most hoaxers are teenaged boys, according to investigators who have had to deal with them.

 

[Mad Hom]

???????? Most hoaxers are teenaged boys, according to investigators who have had to deal with them.

Most of the ones that have been confirmed as hoaxers are sure I guess but I'm not really referring to these youtube jackasses really besides I don't really have any desire to argue with you on the point... but I would propose that there are probably many many hoaxers out there that you don't know about...I'll give you a hint though...their's is most probably the stuff that you actually think is real.

.

 

[William Parcher]

I'm glad you realize it's purely speculative. I'm sure you are aware there were hoaxes long before there was a BFF. Personally, I don't understand why teenaged boys (it usually is - some are overgrown) can't find something better to do than waste the time and money of serious investigators by sending clutzy home movies and making phone calls, but maybe it has to do with a lack of teenaged girls in their lives.

Pure speculation on my part, of course.

Why stereotype a hoaxer as a bored teenager? To characterize hoaxing (by teen or adult) as being a "waste of time" for the hoaxer and the hoaxee (investigator)... is to misunderstand Bigfoot as myth. Many hoaxers probably are thinking that hoaxery by many different people spanning decades is the only thing that really keeps the myth "alive". It may even be regarded as some "personal duty" to keep the fun coming. It's not that they can't find something better to do; it's that hoaxing Bigfoot is a fun thing to do. Anybody could also say that time spent watching a comedy show on TV would be better spent doing that laundry that sits waiting in the basket.

You have mentioned that found 7-mile trackway of huge footprints many times. It seems quite impressive (bordering on excessive) if it is a hoax. My question is if there is any verifiable evidence that this trackway actually did go on for seven miles. Do we have proof of that, or only the testimony of the witness(es)? IOW, if that trackway was really only a half-mile long... is there any way of knowing that now?

 

[kitakaze]

Wu might find this ironic but...it was Krantz's book Big Footprints along with the Bigfeetsus episode of A & E's "Ancient Mysteries where the phenomenon jumped the shark for me

tsk tsk stk... Madness whyever would you seek to alienate posters such as Sweaty who'd never see a 'Happy Days' reference coming. 'Everybody Loves Raymond' however...

I don't profess to understand what your aiming at with the Q&A but in my opinion Fudd is probably not a good candidate. My guess is...he'll think you're up to something and won't answer you truthfully...well maybe at first he will...but as the questions get farther along he'll think you are trying to paint him into a corner...just a guess on my part of course. Fudd is many things....most of them negative...but he ain't stupid...which of course is not to say your Q&A is stupid either...like I said I'm just guessing is all.

I think Huntster would know me well enough by now to know that I wouldn't waste time trying to mess with him on whether or not believing in BF is 'logical'. The point of a simple structured Q&A is that with people like Lu and Hunt you have people that are confident in there positions and have given the matter more than a good deal of thought.

In such a dialogue any inherit flaws or inconsistencies in any of our perspectives on the matter will make themselves apparent. This means if I or they are taking something however seemingly inconsequential for granted we'll be able to identify and learn from it. If I'm confident in myself and my position on the subject than I have no reason to be reluctant at such a dialogue and if I'm not than I really shouldn't be expounding anything anyway.

 

[Mad Hom]

Why stereotype a hoaxer as a bored teenager? To characterize hoaxing (by teen or adult) as being a "waste of time" for the hoaxer and the hoaxee (investigator)... is to misunderstand Bigfoot as myth. Many hoaxers probably are thinking that hoaxery by many different people spanning decades is the only thing that really keeps the myth "alive". It may even be regarded as some "personal duty" to keep the fun coming. It's not that they can't find something better to do; it's that hoaxing Bigfoot is a fun thing to do. Anybody could also say that time spent watching a comedy show on TV would be better spent doing that laundry that sits waiting in the basket.

You have mentioned that found 7-mile trackway of huge footprints many times. It seems quite impressive (bordering on excessive) if it is a hoax. My question is if there is any verifiable evidence that this trackway actually did go on for seven miles. Do we have proof of that, or only the testimony of the witness(es)? IOW, if that trackway was really only a half-mile long... is there any way of knowing that now?

No,no,no...hoaxers are stupid,bored teenagers without anything better to do...it's a fact,Bigfoot Fan says so.

they know this because there's (the bored teenyboppers) is the only handiwork that Bigfoot Fan has been able to see for what it is...a hoax.

They (being Bigfoot Nation) of course do not allow for the skilled hoaxers who just feel that hoaxing Bigfeetsus trackways...and hair...and scat...etc etc is a hoot...a kick in the pants...not so much the hoaxing part mind you...but the not being figured out part.

Bigfoot Fan just can't possibly not be able to discern real from hoax...now could they??

 

[Correa Neto]

Here's a gem for those who insist on cripple foot, Titmus, Marx and Freeman:

Titmus (1993) told me that the Mill Creek, Cripple-foot, and Marx and Freeman handprints were "probably the worst evidence for Bigfoot." He said he was "positive the Freeman handprints were fake and that he had grave doubts about the Marx handprints."

http://www.bigfootencounters.com/articles/skeptical.htm

Now, regarding the provided by Bob Titmus and presented as convincing... Here we have a person who claims to have successfully tracked bigfeet, presented a number of footprint casts, etc. All this expertise and still no reliable evidence! I can't help but see a number of similarities with Marx and Freeman.

 

[kitakaze]

Such as? How about, "Why are some of the lame explain-aways presented by some denialists so readily accepted by other denialists?"

IMO, because those people aren't very interested in being informed on the subject or, conversely, they are and wouldn't define their thoughts regarding the matter as 'lame explain-aways' and remain unconvinced as to what's presented as reliable evidence of bigfoot.

Yes.

Understood. OK, let's talk about hair. What makes you think that something other than sasquatch has been safely ruled out? Have they not been described as for all intents and purposes indistinguishable from human hair?

I think we have far too many onlookers sniping from the sidelines, and not just on this board.

Please be aware that for the sake of control I'm going to disregard any exchange between you and another member related to the Q&A as it contaminates the process. Doing this by PM defeats the purpose and you're free to engage or ignore any comments. If you really are sincere in a desire to change perspectives on the subject than I'm exactly the type of person you should engage in this manner as I've already stated that any flaws in my understanding will be objectively learned from. Please remember my interest is not in enhancing or seeking affirmation for a disbelief in bigfoot.

 

[kitakaze]

William and Madness, just at a glance I can see that you're addressing some central thoughts I have on some of those examples. I'm going to try to stay focused on the Q&A for the time being but what I was really hoping to see were some examples of clever hoaxing in regards to bigfoot. Sorry, PGF doesn't count.

ETA: We've seen plenty of lame hoaxing by others than teenage boys.

 

[William Parcher]

I think we have far too many onlookers sniping from the sidelines, and not just on this board.

I'm curious about which member of BFF copped wolftrax' digital rendering from the Members' Lounge so it could be laughed at here. I don't suppose you could help me out with that one, though. I actually sent him an apology for my comment last night. What's gotten into me?

Lu... you and wolftrax are amusing the hell out of me right now. It's like the blind leading the blind, with you suggesting a covert operation to undermine from within. Har har har!

Why are you curious about which member of BFF took the image from the private "Lounge" - when you know it was me that posted it here? Why not just assert that Parcher must have a BFF membership that allows him to waltz into the Lounge and snatch that "Wolftrax digital rendition"? Or are you thinking conspiracy where someone handed it off to me?

Relief of the burden of Lu's paranoia will come now...

Wolftrax said this on BFF: BTW, whoever "William Parcher" is they seriously took that image out of context. They must be a member here as they dug up that image out of the Member's Lounge, the "Talent" thread, and it was never intended as a film recreation. Just playing around with Poser, but they must have known that. Never intended as serious art either, just experimentation.

But opinions can be fickle.

I will now treat this image as if it were the legendary Bigfoot itself. Wolftrax is wrong about where Bigfoot lives. I saw Bigfoot in a different forest. He doesn't know it, but I found another hotspot. I could take you guys there, but I don't want throngs of researchers trampling the woods and scaring Bigfoot away. Wolftrax "lives" in the same forest where I found Bigfoot, but he thinks his area is the only hotspot.

 

[Huntster]

Originally Posted by Huntster
I've known it all along.

You're in top form, Huntster.

I'm always in a round form.

The vacation must have done you good.

Whether a vacation or exile (penance?), it always does me good.

 

[William Parcher]

...Actually, as you would know if you'd done a step through, many frames show motion blur. That's all that is.

Lu said: The fingers didn't disappear; they're faint. Whole frames are blurry. I'm working on gifs from the non-digitalized version.

I don't know if you are pulling a fast one or being forthright, or what. You posted this gif as support for Patty finger flexing...

Then you start talking about motion blur. Are you retracting your gif as support for flexing, because it actually only shows motion blur? Are you certain or uncertain whether the film shows real and active flexing of the fingers?

 

[LTC8K6]

The hoaxers are no more likely to be shot at, seen, or photographed than sasquatch, imo.

It's the same old tired junk.

If the prints are where no one would see them, then they're real because no hoaxer would bother...

If the prints are in Grand Central Station, they're real because a hoaxer would have been seen...

 

[kitakaze]

BTW,

If there's crow to eat regarding bigfoot, put me down for an extra large with tobasco and mayo.

 

[William Parcher]

... and I'm even prepared to eat a baked crow if somebody confirms the present existence of the Ivory-billed woodpecker.