• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

Just what the world needs - Another Bigfoot thread

Ashles

Pith Artist
Ashles
Joined
Apr 28, 2003
Messages
8,694
Location
The '80s
I must admit to complete bafflement over the ongoing and staggeringly interminable threads about Bigfoot.

My main confusion is why Bigfoot should appear to be more worthy of interest and discussion to certain people than, say, Leprechauns, Fairies, Vampires, Atlantis, the Loch Ness Monster or the giant cats of Bodmin Moor.

Why? What's the appeal? Why are these threads going on and on with, let's be honest, the most extraordinarily ludicrous claims?

Why is an invisible shape changing Bigfoot currently more interesting than Atlantis, which would be at least quite fun?

Can anyone help?
 
Regular, everyday mundane claims cause threads to die untimely deaths. Bizarre claims carry a thread much further.

Our cadre of bigfoot bleevers are just as steadfast in their delusions as the hardcore among the troofers. It is the utter contempt for - or at least severe mangling of - logic and rational thought that makes them engaging.

Long live the bigfoot threads!
 
Last edited:
Ashles said:
Why? What's the appeal?
Click to expand...

Sure beats me.

What I find interesting about the claims is the anthropomorphic angle. Why do the BF proponents focus on some mysterious and elusive variety of biped mammal exhibiting human similarities? Why aren't there similar numbers positing cryptozoological claims of wild cats or bears, or other uncatalogued quadrupeds (or reptiles, or insects, for that matter) ?

Is there a geographic or cultural aspect to BF/yeti/sasquatch claims which may shed any light on the matter?
 
Ashles said:
My main confusion is why Bigfoot should appear to be more worthy of interest and discussion to certain people than, say, Leprechauns, Fairies, Vampires, Atlantis, the Loch Ness Monster or the giant cats of Bodmin Moor.
Click to expand...

Mostly because bears and gorillas don't look anything like those things.
 
The foregoing is all well and good but what's sorely lacking is more photography to evaluate. Something with an actual biological entity in it would be nice.
 
Wolverine said:
What I find interesting about the claims is the anthropomorphic angle. Why do the BF proponents focus on some mysterious and elusive variety of biped mammal exhibiting human similarities? Why aren't there similar numbers positing cryptozoological claims of wild cats or bears, or other uncatalogued quadrupeds (or reptiles, or insects, for that matter)?
Click to expand...

It's because Bigfoot is dramatically fantastic. I mean literally. This is something much like a human but is huge, hairy and mysterious. The element of danger is always there. The Bigfooter-to-Bigfooter dialogue is always an equal measure of intense curiousity and fear. They seek to get close to Bigfoot (expeditions and attempts to lure them in) and at the same time freely talk about the inherent safety risk and fear that they are certain would be part of a truly close encounter. They warn each other that harming a Bigfoot is likely to result in an ambush as others quickly come to the rescue. The whole thing is very high drama.

Some of the many reports of encounters are really great reading. A good writer can create an encounter scenario that is really gripping and not tacitly implausible. We are talking about folk tales, and Bigfoot encounter stories make excellent "campfire stories". Bigfooters cherish these detailed accounts and reading them constitutes an ongoing pleasure for many Bigfooters. These stories can bring Bigfoot right into your lap as you read them. Many Bigfooters speak of real reactions (fear, chills, hair on end, can't sleep, etc) during and after reading these. Any good drama or horror novelist should hope to cause that stuff in their readers.

Bigfoot is the perfect recipe for an enduring myth. It obviously brings enjoyment and intrigue to the Bigfooters. Reading a pro-Bigfoot book filled with encounter stories and great pictures is what got many of them started.
 
I got pictures of a bigfoot

Potilas001.jpg


Potilas003.jpg


And strangely enough, I love the furry creature.
 
Ashles said:
I must admit to complete bafflement over the ongoing and staggeringly interminable threads about Bigfoot.

My main confusion is why Bigfoot should appear to be more worthy of interest and discussion to certain people than, say, Leprechauns, Fairies, Vampires, Atlantis, the Loch Ness Monster or the giant cats of Bodmin Moor.

Why? What's the appeal? Why are these threads going on and on with, let's be honest, the most extraordinarily ludicrous claims?

Why is an invisible shape changing Bigfoot currently more interesting than Atlantis, which would be at least quite fun?

Can anyone help?
Click to expand...

I think it's because, Bigfoot is a plausible creature and therefore the "well, maybe" response, whereas those others...not so much. Well, the regular Bigfoot, not the shape shifting invisible pyramid building ones.

I think you all Bigfooters should switch to the giant squid. Those were mythical, turned out to be real, and are a lot cooler!
 
I Think This Is Legit

Monsterquest- Orang Pendek, or something.
It featured a photographer, Jeremy Holden, who's claimed to have around 60 first species photographs. He said he witnessed this creature, but failed to photograph it. I find this interesting, and like I mentioned earlier in a bigfoot thread, the ease in studying this animal when compared to bigfoot makes it an advantage. Like the relative small amount of plaster and such. :)
 
I think one reason is that, unlike many people who make rather interesting claims, a lot of bigfooters actually do research, and even get out there and look for things themselves. While there are plenty of frauds and nutballs involved as well, there are also people who are genuinely trying to prove something, rather than just coming out with the philosophical dribble that many woos prefer.

Another big reason is that bigfoot is far more realistic than many claims. Most woo claims break the laws of physics, biology, common sense and anything else they can find, even though their proponents usually don't realise this. Bigfoot doesn't. It's entirely possible that there is a large mammal living in the wilderness that we haven't documented. Unlikely, given the evidence, but certainly not impossible. Of course, it depends on the exact claim and many of the claims made about it aren't actually possible, but regardless of that, the idea of there being something out there that we haven't found yet just isn't that implausible. People who wouldn't be dragged into discussions about most woo can end up talking about bigfoot. Having a few crazies to stir the pot up just adds some extra spice to the mix and makes it go on all the longer.
 
Last edited:
Bigfoot Woo's believe they are the Chris Columbus of the modern age. They are trying to prove the world is not flat. Difference is, Columbus was right.

Bigfoot also represents a place in our psyche, Possibly it acts as a physical answer to a neurological question. Do people want to admit they were so tired that they hallucinated? Do people want to admit that they were paralysed by their own brain, and a weight placed on their chest by a dream? No, they want to explain it with a physical tangible explanation. Unfortunately, Bigfoot itself is no more physical than a Narcoleptic sleep experience.

The thing that adds to the Bigfoot phenomenon, is the legends which accompany it. The thing that isn't understood is that Indians probably had Sleep Paralysis, and Fevers back then as well.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom