• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Simple Challenge For Bigfoot Supporters

Status
Not open for further replies.
kitakaze said:
Hi, Huntster. Welcome back. How've you been?
Click to expand...

Hi, friend. I've been doing great. Did a little fishing and snowmobiling while on exile.

Didn't catch much besides good views and fresh air.

There are lots of moose running around out there......

How're things slugging along in the R&P?
Click to expand...

That's a tough place. It's where I tend to get myself in trouble.

It's been a while there too, right?
Click to expand...

Funny about that R&P thing; I came to this forum after Lu made reference to it at BFF, then while wandering around here I ran into a post there laying down some serious blasphemy.

That's when I decided that this was a great place to fight.

Been here ever since.........

I thought maybe there might have been too much water temperature and pumice/volcanic ash references for your taste lately and not enough general ideology. So was it Mad Hom posting that brought you back?
Click to expand...

This banter regarding cast and photo analysis bores me. While a valid look into the phenomenon, I don't think it will amount to much revelation, but I'll listen and read quietly until something impresses me.

Yeah, Mad Horn and LTC bring me out of silence. It's fun to poke at rats scurrying about in cages of their own creation.

Actually, I'd love it if you joined me in a short and simple Q&A on sasquatch, too.
Click to expand...

It would be my pleasure.

I think there are important differences to you and Lu's perspective on the topic.
Click to expand...

There might be differences in my and Lu's perspective, but I don't think they're "important."

I think the similarities are much more important.

As I said to her, no baiting, no tricks- just a better understanding of differing perspectives on sasquatch through simple controlled dialogue. One question, one answer, the more basic the better. Of course I'll be assuming the position of being doubtful of bigfoot.
Click to expand...

Well, okay.......I suppose.

I'm a fisherman and hunter. Baiting and trickery are inherent in my nature.

I guess it all depends on how you define "baiting" and "trickery".

I'll try to be straightforward. Let me know in your consistently honest manner if you think I'm crossing a line.

I'll give you the same first question I asked LAL though I think I could guess the answer better-

Do you believe without doubt the existence of sasquatches?
Click to expand...

No. I have a little doubt. Like I've written in the past, I'm about 95% certain that sasquatches exist.

Is that the answer you would have guessed, and is that honest enough?
 
LTC8K6 said:
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, the're real because a hoaxer would have been seen...
Click to expand...
LTC, do you or anyone recall an news item involving a case where a man or a few men (one guy in a suit) staged a bigfoot hoax on a tour bus route and many of the witnesses gave testimony of how they were sure they weren't looking at a man in a suit? I'm thinking Florida but my memory is surely not so hot.
 
LTC8K6 said:
Next she'll trot out the stilts, or the giant wheel with feet attached, etc.
Click to expand...

No, no, no, no, no... read Krantz, read Meldrum.

Humans can't make those crop circles overnight either.....
Click to expand...
Oh, the basic, el-cheapo looking ones, sure... but the intricate, detailed, mathematically precise ones? No way.

082106cropcircles.jpg
300px-CropCircleSwirl.jpeg


Human crop circle. .............................................. Non-human crop circle.


RayG
 
kitakaze said:
....In Huntster's case I think he's already stated that it was the PGF that was originally responsible for an interest but the alleged track find that sealed it....
Click to expand...

Close.

First for me came the book "Maybe Monsters" and "Mystery Monsters" by Gardiner Soule, published in the early 60's. Among the crypto-creatures he wrote about were sasquatches (along with the Loch Ness Monster, giant squids, etc.).

The PGF provided more evidence for me.

My own trackway find pretty much sealed for me.

I still withhold a 5% margin of error.

I would like to note that just two years after finding that trackway in California, I've was in a Southeast Asian jungle for a year, then spent over thirty years in Alaska living a very outdoorsy life, yet I've never found other physical evidence.

IMO, that isn't much of a factor in my opinion.

In my mind an interest in BF shouldn't discount any evidence you might find but whether or not it is easily attributable to something other than a living sasquatch. I'm certain that in both our cases they are and also that Huntster would disagree.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure I agree or disagree. For example, if I was easily swayed into finding a sasquatch behind every bush, I'd have "found" lots of them here in Alaska over the past 30 years. Hell, I've seen so many huge brown bear trackways over the years that I couldn't possibly remember them all, yet never once did I consider any of them as sasquatch prints.
 
kitakaze said:
tsk tsk stk... ......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.
Click to expand...

Wow, what a fresh, honest perspective!

Expect to be pounded by some of the "skeptics" here for this approach, my friend, but I welcome it.
 
Huntster said:
Hi, friend. I've been doing great. Did a little fishing and snowmobiling while on exile.

Didn't catch much besides good views and fresh air.

There are lots of moose running around out there......
Click to expand...
Good (read envious) to hear. My views consist mostly of trains and buildings blocking out the sun.:)
Huntster said:
That's a tough place. It's where I tend to get myself in trouble.
Click to expand...
I'm sure I would, too. I try to avoid it like the plague (I drop a little peck here and there) as I'm sure if I made it a habit I'd have some kind of spectacular meltdown, cursing and rabid on my way out.
Huntster said:
Funny about that R&P thing; I came to this forum after Lu made reference to it at BFF, then while wandering around here I ran into a post there laying down some serious blasphemy.

That's when I decided that this was a great place to fight.

Been here ever since.........
Click to expand...
Funny how overwhelming opposition makes turkeys of some and others prosper from it. I dropped a couple posts in DDJ's 'Why churches are dangerous' thread. I'm curious on your take of that one.
Huntster said:
This banter regarding cast and photo analysis bores me. While a valid look into the phenomenon, I don't think it will amount to much revelation, but I'll listen and read quietly until something impresses me.

Yeah, Mad Horn and LTC bring me out of silence. It's fun to poke at rats scurrying about in cages of their own creation.
Click to expand...
I guessed you think something along those lines.
Huntster said:
It would be my pleasure.
Click to expand...
Great, let's get to it!
Huntster said:
There might be differences in my and Lu's perspective, but I don't think they're "important."

I think the similarities are much more important.
Click to expand...
I'm thinking what differences make both of you excellent choice to engage in such a dialogue is that LAL is more the walking encyclopedia with links out the wazoo where as you've personally encountered what may have been sign.
Huntster said:
Well, okay.......I suppose.

I'm a fisherman and hunter. Baiting and trickery are inherent in my nature.

I guess it all depends on how you define "baiting" and "trickery".

I'll try to be straightforward. Let me know in your consistently honest manner if you think I'm crossing a line.
Click to expand...
I don't think I'll waist time trying to trick a trickster. I just mean I'm not pissing around in a hollow attempt to look smart.
Huntster said:
No. I have a little doubt. Like I've written in the past, I'm about 95% certain that sasquatches exist.

Is that the answer you would have guessed, and is that honest enough?
Click to expand...
Yes and of course.

I pretty much know the answer to my next question, too, but for the sake of order and progression I'll ask anyway. Do you think a population of sasquatches exists anywhere in Alaska? I'm thinking of Hairy Man's earlier comments on BF in Alaska as a reason to ask.
 
Last edited:
kitakaze said:
LTC, do you or anyone recall an news item involving a case where a man or a few men (one guy in a suit) staged a bigfoot hoax on a tour bus route and many of the witnesses gave testimony of how they were sure they weren't looking at a man in a suit? I'm thinking Florida but my memory is surely not so hot.
Click to expand...

This one?

VANCOUVER, Canada (AP) - A bus driver and several passengers who reported seeing the legendary man-beast Sasquatch were tricked by four practical jokers using a $200 monkey suit and shoulder pads, according to the hoaxsters...
Click to expand...
[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]RayG
[/FONT]
 
New Westminster (CP) - Radio Station CKNW broadcast reports Monday that a Sasquatch sighted 10 days ago near Erroch Lake in the Fraser Valley was a hoax perpetrated by three persons, but veteran Sasquatch hunter Rene Dahinden wants proof.

The radio station said three persons faked large footprints using plaster casts and one of them dressed up in a fur suit. Dahinden said in an interview he'd like to see the suit. "If they can produce the evidence that this was a hoax, I would like to see it. The hoax would be more important than a real Sasquatch sighting...it would teach us a lesson to smarten up."

Dahinden said he heard similar reports of a hoax involving the legendary ape-like forest creature. "It (the report) claimed the three persons involved would also fake sightings in Washington, Oregon and California." "CKNW doesn't know whether or not it was a hoax because it doesn't have any evidence. Let them produce the fur suit and the material used to make the footprints."

Dahinden said he was in the Fraser Valley community of Mission when RCMP questioned Pacific Stage Lines bus driver Pat Lindquist who reported seeing the sasquatch a mile east of Lake Erroch on his run from Harrison Hot Springs to Vancouver.

"The questioning was very professional and I cannot see how Lindquist could have mistaken a man in a fur suit for the real thing." "Maybe my view was colored but if there was a hoax, let's see them re-enact the whole thing." Dahinden said Lindquist would have to be in a state of shock to make such a mistake.
Click to expand...

If they had a movie they could have made a mint....
 
kitakaze said:
Originally Posted by Huntster
There might be differences in my and Lu's perspective, but I don't think they're "important."

I think the similarities are much more important.
Click to expand...

I'm thinking what differences make both of you excellent choice to engage in such a dialogue is that LAL is more the walking encyclopedia with links out the wazoo where as you've personally encountered what may have been sign.
Click to expand...

Lu is indeed a walking encyclopedia. And she is a quite a lady, too, even though she's tough enough to "slug it out" with people here.

The differences there compared to me is that I may have a decent memory for history, but compared to her encyclopedic knowledge, I'm an infant.

And I could never be mistaken as a gentleman........

I don't think I'll waist time trying to trick a trickster. I just mean I'm not pissing around in a hollow attempt to look smart.
Click to expand...

I believe you, and I believe you're truly interested in honest inquiry vrs. debate.

I pretty much know the answer to my next question, too, but for the sake of order and progression I'll ask anyway. Do you think a population of sasquatches exists anywhere in Alaska?
Click to expand...

Even though I've never personally found sign here in Alaska (despite spending much more time in the outdoors here than I ever did in California), I'm certain that if they exist at all, they exist in areas of Alaska.

I'm also fairly confident that the area of Alaska where I live and spend most of my time is not an area where these creatures have any consistent density.

Was that answer close to your expectations?

I'm thinking of Hairy Man's earlier comments on BF in Alaska as a reason to ask.
Click to expand...

Which comments are those?
 
That article is beautiful. It shows the colors of the late Bigfooter Dahinden. If it weren't an admitted hoax, this sighting would probably one of the most powerful examples of credible eyewitness testimony that a Bigfooter could ever ask for. A whole busload of witnesses. Dayum!

I wonder if anyone on that bus (besides the shill) thought it was a hoax all the way through the episode, including after reading the driver's testimony in the news.
 
"The questioning was very professional and I cannot see how Lindquist could have mistaken a man in a fur suit for the real thing."
Click to expand...


There are only two possible answers..

Either Lindquist was lying, or it was a real Bigfoot...

P.S.

Lindquist was a police officer too!!! They don't lie, and they can't be fooled ...
 
Last edited:
Huntster said:
Even though I've never personally found sign here in Alaska (despite spending much more time in the outdoors here than I ever did in California), I'm certain that if they exist at all, they exist in areas of Alaska.

I'm also fairly confident that the area of Alaska where I live and spend most of my time is not an area where these creatures have any consistent density.

Was that answer close to your expectations?



Which comments are those?
Click to expand...
Sorry, I meant these comments. This thread has been moving pretty fast and that post was ten pages ago. Don't forget that the Q&A format is supposed to include a (preferably short and simple) question from you to me as someone doubtful about sasquatch.

Do you have any thoughts or surmations about what sasquatches adaptive survival strategies might be in Alaska?
 
William Parcher said:
Why stereotype a hoaxer as a bored teenager?
Click to expand...

I don't know if they were bored or not, but from talking with one of the prominent investigators of days gone by (when there was no YouTube) and from information from documentaries, books and websites, that's the typical profile (with or without the "bored").

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?
Click to expand...

Even half a mile would be impressive considering how vertical much of it was. And it was a double trackway, not just one.

Hopefully the film is still in the possession of the Vancouver Columbian. One witness is dead. I don't know about the others. I wish I'd asked how they determined the distance. Points on a map would have worked if they knew exactly where they lost it in forest.

There's current activity in the area, so I'm not too worried about it.
 
William Parcher said:
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...

[qimg]http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=5499&stc=1&d=1171287320[/qimg]

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?
Click to expand...

Even blurred, there's something there to begin with, isn't there? I don't know if you've ever done a step forward through the sequence, but even on the nondigitalized versions, there are blurry frames. You'd think a good hoaxer would have used a tripod!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom