Simple Challenge For Bigfoot Supporters

[LAL]

Rick does seem convinced it's highly iimprobable, though other sources point to the fact Roosevelt elk are found in that area*.

I didn't know there were any other kind in Skamania County.

This site just says "Elk", but note the success rate in Washington State of only 7-10% with thousands of hunters out trying to shoot them.

http://wdfw.wa.gov/lands/reg5_hunting_oct05.pdf

 

[Correa Neto]

Ah yeah...

The old "inhuman proportions" argument...
These also have "inhuman proportions". Articulations are located at places that would discount people wearing costumes. IMs are also not within human parameters. Oh, and humans skulls would not fit inside some of those heads, also! Note that two animals are quadrupedal!
These must be real animals, then...
I bet Kitakaze will enjoy the first four pics!

Wake me up when reliable evidence for bigfoot shows up.

 

[Teresa.Hall]

double post. Lost my internet connection during a storm while I was trying to edit.

 

[mangler]

LAL,

In regards to your statement.

"This site just says "Elk", but note the success rate in Washington State of only 7-10% with thousands of hunters out trying to shoot them."

You have to take into account all the restrictions that apply for certain GMU's, for instance St. Helens has a three point minimum for most of it's GMU's, Oak Creek is spike only ( it's called game management ) . . . Then take into account that the vast majority of elk hunters only go for the weekends, throw in a few cocktails and campfire stories and their season has come and gone. In all reality a 7 -10 percent success rate is very good (I think it's 30 - 50 percent if you can draw a special permit).

To be quite blatant most elk hunters suck at hunting, they circle their RV's and spend most of their time BSing around the fire with old friends that they only get to see once a year (not that there is anything wrong with that).


m

 

[Teresa.Hall]

LAL wrote:
Well said, Lu. And in a level-headed, unemotional way.

Teresa's comment..."If "wisecracking" and sarcasm is all you have for us.."
is so far "off the mark" it's ridiculous.

If you'd like to prove me wrong, kitakaze.....then discuss it with me over on Melissa's board. Or are you afraid to???

Why not discuss it here? Why do you want him to go to Melissa's board?

 

[LAL]

To be quite blatant most elk hunters suck at hunting, they circle their RV's and spend most of their time BSing around the fire with old friends that they only get to see once a year (not that there is anything wrong with that).

Take only the head and hooves and Superglue my lock on the first day of season, speaking only from my own experience, of course.

 

[LAL]

I'll have to listen to the interview.

Kitakaze, did Rick mean there wasn't a herd in the area at the time? I can't imagine him saying there are no Roosevelt Elk. Rocky Mountain Elk are further east.

I seem to recall reading some of the animal tracks were old. Sarmiento was specific about what tracks were found on LMS.

 

[SweatyYeti]

Why not discuss it here? Why do you want him to go to Melissa's board?

Because, as I mentioned in my post earlier...Melissa's board has stricter posting guidelines than this board....and many fewer skeptics. It would, very simply, be easier to have an intelligent debate there, than it would be here. On this board, there's too much game-playing, and personal attacks to be worth the time invested.

Several months ago, I put together a nice collection of kitakaze's personal attacks, insults, and general rudeness towards me....in a post I entitled "Kitty Goes Nuts".
I'd be more than happy to re-post it later...so you can see for yourself the kind of BS that his posts here consist of.

Also....WHY NOT discuss it on her board.....he's a member of it.

 

[Correa Neto]

Teresa, Melissa and Kathy,

Thanks for submitting my questions to Noll. I was not expecting to see them all asked!

Melissa, apologies were not needed regarding my name's spelling. People who do not speak Portuguese or Spanish will probably have a hard time with it. No problem.

Thank you all again.

Maybe later we can discuss Noll's POVs.

 

[kitakaze]

kit,

Did he really say that?

Yup.

Need I say more?

Nope.

 

[kitakaze]

The May issue of Bigfoot Times, containing the infamous "Skookum Hokum" article, has now been posted with Perez' permission on Bigfoot Forums:

http://www.bigfootforums.com/index.php?act=attach&type=post&id=24927

Mr. Perez has some kind of bias towards something. He's just trying to stir the pot.

 

[kitakaze]

It really is highly amusing how the misguided fools here STILL bang on about Bob H being the man in the Patty suit despite the fact that his claim has more holes in it than a second hand dart board and despite the fact that he doesn't walk 'just like Patty' nor do his body proportions match up with Patty's and despite the fact that claim has well and truly had the last nails banged into it a long time ago.

Nice...

All there is to Bob H's claim is anecdodal evidence. Anecdotal evidence that has been PROVEN to be incorrect, false, inconsistent and contradictory in very salient aspects of the story. Yet still the old buzzards here cling to it like a life preserver in a stormy ocean. If it wasn't so hilarious it would be pathetic.

Tell us what happened when the creature was first encountered.

 

[kitakaze]

In sharp contrast....kitakaze declined to discuss the concept of "reliable evidence" with me on the SFB board....

Hmmm... Why ever would I avoid discussion with you on that board?

not because it had been "thoroughly discussed elsewhere"....but because he can't. Melissa's strict posting guidelines won't allow for the evasiveness and game-playing that this board allows for.

Sounds like a claim.

If you'd like to prove me wrong, kitakaze.....then discuss it with me over on Melissa's board. Or are you afraid to???

My guess is......you never will.

Shaking in my boots. Why don't you just start a thread and call it 'baggage from another forum'? BTW, what about and how did you prove yourself right?

 

[kitakaze]

I'll have to listen to the interview.

Kitakaze, did Rick mean there wasn't a herd in the area at the time? I can't imagine him saying there are no Roosevelt Elk. Rocky Mountain Elk are further east.

I seem to recall reading some of the animal tracks were old. Sarmiento was specific about what tracks were found on LMS.

He said there are no Roosevelt Elk.

 

[kitakaze]

Several months ago, I put together a nice collection of kitakaze's personal attacks, insults, and general rudeness towards me....in a post I entitled "Kitty Goes Nuts".
I'd be more than happy to re-post it later...so you can see for yourself the kind of BS that his posts here consist of.

'The sewer' is waiting. I'm sure it will demolish requests for reliable evidence of bigfoot.

Also....WHY NOT discuss it on her board.....he's a member of it.

Excellent! You've come across some reliable evidence of bigfoot since you left us? What a shock! You're back!

 

[SweatyYeti]

'The sewer' is waiting. I'm sure it will demolish requests for reliable evidence of bigfoot.Excellent! You've come across some reliable evidence of bigfoot since you left us? What a shock! You're back!

Not to worry! I'm leaving in a few minutes!

I only came back to give Lu some friendly support... ...it was called for.
She's EARNED all the support she can get....especially posting on this forum.

I did not come back to debate anything with anybody. It involves too much wasted time.

BTW.....nice BS response to my request/challenge, kitakaze!
I fully expected it. It's what you do best.

 

[SweatyYeti]

Here you go, Teresa....from March 17th...this thread...enjoy...

WELCOME one and all to another exciting episode of "Kitty Goes Nuts"....

The heartbreaking tale of a well-meaning, obnoxious guy who joined a discussion forum...and suddenly, without warning...while in the heat of discussion......simply went NUTS.

Take it away, kitty!.......

"Oh oh, look at me! I'm a semantic prancer! I'm prancing around like a magical pixie horse. Oh oh, there I go. La la la, weeee!"

Sweaty, do have any idea how silly you're making yourself look?

Now that's pathetic. Sweaty is actually trying to pretend

You know, Sweaty, that BS wouldn't look like a complete joke if

You're so turned around here, you don't even know it.

Sweaty, I know your BS too well. Aaaaand now I get to call you on it.

Sweaty, your dishonesty and transparent quote manipulation isn't fooling anyone.

This is one of the most astounding lines of BS you've ever tried to pass off here. How stupid do you think we are?

I suggest you give some serious thought to exactly what the hell your point is and what you think you are debating.
Yup, I take back the benefit of the doubt I gave Sweaty. Considering how many times it's been brought up I'm definitely going with dodging.

Hey, Sweat, what exactly are you discussing 'cuz some of us ain't so sure?

See, the problem is Sweaty's not interested in things that might lead to some reliable evidence

Semantics seems to be some kind of irresistable pathological thing with you, doesn't it, Sweaty?

What a surprise, Sweaty. You just keep duckin' and weavin' and who knows, you may actually get good if you keep at it.

Careful you don't excite Asparagus Boy.

Here kitty discusses a bad habit of mine:

You're the one doing all the squirming.

Squirm, Sweaty, squirm.

Sweaty, no matter how much you squeal and squirm sightings are not going to become reliable evidence.

Sorry, Kevin, no squirming here.

Try to quit the squirming and manipulation

You can squirm yourself senseless but it's nothing but an excercise in futility

Of course, he may want to squirm up a much anticipated explanation for that

It's truly hilarious how many times you've tried to squirm with this.

Sorry, Kev's feeling a bit squirmy today.

Oh, another thing, Sweaty. Do you plan on squirming quite a bit more with this?:

kitty notices a pattern of behavior:

Typical Sweaty talking out his butt about things he doesn't understand

Belz, this is one of Sweaty's most classic typical behaviours.

Typical Sweaty biting off only what he thinks he can chew and ignoring the rest.

Your typical, predictable, boring pattern of lame behaviour

Since you typically seem to not be getting the point...

I'm having a hard time believing you genuinely don't get the point and aren't playing your typical games.

Maybe while you're....talking to Santa and engaging in....your typical semantic masturbation

It doesn't take Kevin long to make his predictable plays for semantic quibbling

kitty becomes fascinated with my state of mental development:

Being an adolescent makes it hard, I'm sure.

This is an example of the kind of little tells in Sweety's posts that make me fairly certain we are not speaking with an adult.

I didn't ask for his age, just if he is an adolescent. That seems to be the case.

Is Sweaty an adolescent?

I've seriously started going on the assumption that he's an adolescent.

are you aware whether or not he's an adolescent?

...I must again ask, how old are you, Kevin?

Oh and one more thing- how old are you Kevin, seriously?

kitty smells a troll:

Sweaty, you are a pathetic troll.

I'm having trouble being interested in your latest round of trolling.

Still trolling, hey?

You, like Sweaty, are a complete and totally pathetic troll.

kitty discovers I've been obfuscating:

I think I'll translate 'elaborate' as 'obfuscate'.

Let's see if we can't begin to untangle and unravel Sweaty's pathological obfuscation.

Again you obfuscate and try and twist what is said to you. Drop the BS, Sweaty.

also the numbers of times he obfuscates, has a semantic fit, and squirms with the concept of evidence in general,

And in conclusion...this golden nugget...

"Sweaty believes he has evidence that I have hostility problems".

Oh...wait a second....there's ONE more thing kitty would like to say before we conclude this episode of "Kitty Goes Nuts".....

"Sweaty, I can only offer my sincere testimony that I have a wonderfully interesting, fulfilling, and well-balanced life devoid of anything in the way of anger/hostility problems or major personal problems ......
...and...in addition...let me add...
....."I will readily admit to having insulted you, been hostile to you, and accused you of various things".

Deleted Scenes:

"No worries, Belz, I'm as cool as a cucumber."

"I told you not to mess around with quotes." (who's messing around, kitty?!! )

"You've....consistently shown a lack of interest in intelligent discussion with skeptics here."

(Well...there's absolutely no reason to discuss anything with krazy kitty...or is that kittykrazy?)

"Intelligent discussion".......here??! No.

 

[Teresa.Hall]

Well that was interesting, but if you don't think there is intelligent discussion to be had here, then the question is... why post here? I don't guess I understand that. Can you enlighten me?

 

[Melissa]

Teresa, Melissa and Kathy,

Thanks for submitting my questions to Noll. I was not expecting to see them all asked!

Melissa, apologies were not needed regarding my name's spelling. People who do not speak Portuguese or Spanish will probably have a hard time with it. No problem.

Thank you all again.

Maybe later we can discuss Noll's POVs.

Your very welcome Correa Neto. I was very happy to ask the questions you wanted answered, they were well thought out and we all felt very appropriate to the conversation. Im only sorry there wasnt time to ask more.. I hope to have Rick Noll back, I look forward to you adding to the question pool

I really did feel bad about the name thing.. Can I ask a question - what does your name mean? I am assuming there is a meaning.

On another unrelated note.

LAL, your right - I can speak for myself. First of all, I stand behind my administrators and moderators when they feel they need to make tough decisions. If you were upset with the action taken - you should have sent me an email. You were not the only person disciplined, and a couple will tell you an apology and understanding of what the searchforbigfoot.org is about helped pave the way for an early return. I don't think you truly understand what it means to have one of these boards. Everyone - and I MEAN EVERYONE, thinks your being mean to them. It doesn't matter what side we are talking about.

Teresa and the other Moderators on that board have a job, and that job is crystal clear - to maintain order and allow for discussion. When all this came down - there was NONE. It was a free for all, and we had to do something. If you think the decision to suspend anyone was one Teresa, I and the other staff members celebrated - your absolutely wrong.

All I have asked since day one was to have conversation of this mystery - in a calm, rational and adult fashion - without all the sniping and name calling and sarcasm. Teresa does not just enforce the rules by herself.

I find it very unfortunate that once again drama from my website has ended up here - where no one really cares. If you have an issue with the searchforbigfoot.org and the way its run, email me, don't bad mouth the staff who devote their time and energy - email me, they are simply enforcing the rules I asked them to.

We have always gotten along LAL - but I wont sit back and say nothing while you bad mouth the people who have worked very hard on this website.

 

[LAL]

Bad mouth? Where? Please read posts #4768 #4771 and #4777 above and show me where I've bad-mouthed anyone. I even made a little joke about my joke. Perhaps I should have said it was 8th grade.

Last I saw, I was talking about elk.

I was surprised to see this come up here, and from William Parcher, no less. I don't know how he knew about the suspensions. Perhaps another JREF member told him or he's capable of reading your board himself.

I did want to e-mail you at the time but was advised not to by a couple of my cyber friends. I'd have said essentially the same thing I said here, only shorter.

I wasn't particularly upset (baffled and hurt, maybe), but I would like to have seen that little red box removed. It really spoils my avatar.

I'm somewhat aware of forum problems. I have a friend who's a mod and another who owned a forum. I also know Teresa worked very hard and was losing a lot of sleep. I did what I could to help build the membership and keep the discussions going. I'm sorry that backfired, but I'm not sorry for trying to inject a little levity. (I crack me up sometimes. LMAO.) I certainly didn't think I'd get SY in trouble with it, and after five or so readings of the guidelines I don't see where we violated them. There might have been some other way to handle that if anyone was getting offended.

Perhaps I missed something, but I didn't see anything like the brawling that goes on here and I thought things were going well, if a little slowly, after that thread was reopened.

Since not EVERYONE posts on your board, I'd appreciate a little clarification there, by PM or e-mail or phone or on the board if you'd prefer. Examples, please. I do not see myself as being mean and it comes a shock to learn that anybody, let alone EVERYBODY thinks I was. Was I seen as being mean in all my posts or just a couple out of a couple of hundred?

Wasn't I nice to Ray Crowe about Homo erectus and Tom Lancaster in the Australia discussion and Lori's dad on Paranthropus (I'd assured him of a warm welcome, too.....) and didn't I ignore SG completely even though I couldn't find the Ignore feature? It bowled me over when he sort of supported me for asking a question (I've already apologized for asking the question) but I've never thanked him.

I'll do that now. Thanks, Greg.

I haven't read every word on this board, but I'm unaware of any drama being dragged from there to here until this incident, and I'm not the one who brought it here. Of course, that sort of thing happens with other boards too. Just ask Paul.

Now, moving right along, I've only listened to one radio show, the one with Dr. Meldrum. I thought it was great.

Was the interview Kitakaze's talking about on your show? Do you remember just what Rick said about no Roosevelt Elk? I suspect there's some kind of misunderstanding here. Rick is woods savvy, and I'm not understanding this at all.