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.
The thing that bothers me about it is the complete blindness to the idea that there may not be any Bigfoot to find. The complete failure to find anything of substance is met with "well, we just haven't looked hard enough."
At some point, you have to consider the possibility that there's no there there.
Well, pretty much what Cuddles said. Excluding the paranormal/alien/interdimensional babble, there's nothing that breaks the laws of physics when it comes to bigfeet. We know that there are and that there were large primates; we know that there are and there were upright-walking, bipedal primates and that some specimens fall within the (lower?) range of bigfoot size. Its perhaps one of the most plausible fringe subjects- more than Atlantis, if you ask me.
The main issue that truly speaks against the claim is that not a single piece of reliable evidence for the existence of such creatures was found and/or made public so far. However, all it takes is beating these odds. Yes, its possible, but the odds are very low.
There's another issue, however. Its the criteria used to select, among the full spectra of "manifestations" or aspects that compose the bifgfoot phenomenon, the features that will be used to buil a "plausible" bigfoot. Its my personal opinion that these criteria are quite loose and arbitrary. This brings us to an issue that I think many bigfoot proponents that post here seem to be misunderstanding- methodology. Regardless of the fact that some have an approach that is different from the standard woo, the methodology used is quite often deeply flawed. Many posts from skeptics are actually addressing this problem and what the proponents must do if they want to be really taken seriously by mainstream science: dump the bad data sets (regardless of the emotional attachments and how iconic they might be for some), create a sound research methodology and start from scratch, if needed. This is not antagonism, this is not denialism. Feel free not to believe, but this is actually an incentive. I believe this is part of the answer to the question about the bigfoot threads longevity. Of course, the "last man standing" tactics some footers seem to use also has a huge role.
My answer : You are looking too deep. The reason bigfoot is so atractive to woo-er is that there are photographic/film evidence of it (naturally one may know better on what is evidence of what, like many discussing on the bigfoot skeptic thread, but the average public probably not). The same goes for nessy. Despite all evidence of hoax it is still going on in public mind. Should I cite the moon face on mars ? The average public will see a film and take it as evidence at face value. So this is why bigfoot is more spoken than other less or more ludicrilous stuff.
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.
The only problem is Columbus was wrong. Not about the world being flat. Nobody believed that. But about the world being far smaller that everyone else knew it was. It was common knowledge that it was impossible at the time for a ship to reach the Indies by sailing west. The voyage was simply too long, the crew would die at see long before they reached their destination. A previously unknown land mass was the only thing that saved his life. But everyone who denied him funding for his first voyage was absolutely right. He was a woefully uninformed navigator who was on a mission to kill his crew.
Sometimes it's better to be lucky.
(I'm sorry for this complete derail, but as was pointed out by the original poster, there's little value in yet another bigfoot thread.)
My answer : You are looking too deep. The reason bigfoot is so atractive to woo-er is that there are photographic/film evidence of it (naturally one may know better on what is evidence of what, like many discussing on the bigfoot skeptic thread, but the average public probably not). The same goes for nessy. Despite all evidence of hoax it is still going on in public mind. Should I cite the moon face on mars ? The average public will see a film and take it as evidence at face value. So this is why bigfoot is more spoken than other less or more ludicrilous stuff.
Maybe I am, indeed. But please note I am talking about JREF, and not the general public. When it comes to the general public, I believe bigfoot is not as popular as Atlantis, for example, based on the number of books on both subjects. I belive Martian civilizations is also a "hotter" topic than bigfoot among the general public.
It seems I do have a weak woospot for bigfoot. Heck, I would like to share the world with a bigfoot-like species. It could raise so many interesting questions and challenges! But I also would like to peek at the ruins of a Martian civilizations. That would be even more exciting! A sunken 10Ky-old city in the middle of the Atlantic would also rock.
But lets face it, compared with Martian civilizations and Atlantis, bigfeet are much more plausible. Its not a matter of the quality of the available "evidence", its a matter of what we already know about the geology and biology. This, coupled with the other factors I previously cited, plus the relative frequent input of new pro-bigfoot posters, responds for my personal interest and participation at the threads.
My answer: You are looking too deep. The reason bigfoot is so atractive to woo-er is that there are photographic/film evidence of it (naturally one may know better on what is evidence of what, like many discussing on the bigfoot skeptic thread, but the average public probably not).
Bigfootery was well established before we had any photos or film. There were drawings in books however. The detailed encounter stories have always been present and they create a mental image of Bigfoot in the absence of anything graphic.
The story surrounding this encounter needs to be addressed further. It's been requested that someone put themselves in that location to further study the scale, because the ferns aren't helping.
It's an interesting peek inside Bigfootery and how some evaluate new photographic evidence. Spoiler: Presenter majorly loses his cool and has his flamethrower expletives censored. Big fun!
A friend of the photographer presented it there and is talking about it. It is claimed that the friend witnessed this as a living animal which started out on 'all fours', then stood upright and walked away bipedally. A photo was taken and you see the animal that was observed.
Suspicious for three reasons. No arms showing. Front side contour is somehow a straight line from head to waste. Branches covering butt show unnatural pattern.
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?
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.
It's been mentioned already but I just wanted to add that Columbus wasn't trying to prove the earth was round.
See my sig - no-one had believed that for many centuries. (Sorry to be a pedant but it's one of those enduring myths that just bugs me more than it really should - like the 'duck's quack doesn't echo' myth)
But I agree with your point that BF believers, like conspiracy nuts, always want to be a step ahead and in posession of information others do not have.
Even if it's not real information.
I also agree with the "It's almost plausible" explanation for the endurance of the myth.
Well, except for anything historian posts.
Suspicious for three reasons. No arms showing. Front side contour is somehow a straight line from head to waste. Branches covering butt show unnatural pattern.
This reminds me of how this site noted that the Loch Ness Monster was treated more seriously by science (expedition-wise) was because there were less weirdos involved in Nessie "research." The fact that Bermuda Triangle woos are pointing this out makes it even funnier.
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.
It's been mentioned already but I just wanted to add that Columbus wasn't trying to prove the earth was round.
See my sig - no-one had believed that for many centuries. (Sorry to be a pedant but it's one of those enduring myths that just bugs me more than it really should - like the 'duck's quack doesn't echo' myth)
But I agree with your point that BF believers, like conspiracy nuts, always want to be a step ahead and in posession of information others do not have.
Even if it's not real information.
I also agree with the "It's almost plausible" explanation for the endurance of the myth.
Well, except for anything historian posts.
Can you help me out Ashles, with a couple of questions.
First of all, I can't remember whether you are a man or a woman.
Secondly, What is the correct spelling, idyut or idyit, that is used to denote a particular short sighted individual who may not be fully aware of their own condition? I fergit.
Lastly and as a way of lengthening your eyesight. There is a difference between facts and beliefs. You should probably write this down with indelible ink on the back of your hands, from here on out. We will all wait for you to finish scribbling.
Bigfoot is fact.
A 24/7 Flesh & blood Bigfoot is a belief
Paranormal Bigfoot is fact.
A lack of bigfoot's authenticity is a belief
The Patterson-Gimlin bigfoot is a fact
A Patterson-Gimlin man in a bigfoot suit is a belief
Inter-dimensional people are fact.
Atheism is a belief
The higher/parallel dimensions are a fact, and they are at least the exact same size as our 3-dimensions.
Supernatural people that exist in the higher dimensions, are a fact
Angels are a fact
Ghosts are a fact
Orbs are a fact
Life after death is a fact
Spending a least part of your life after death, is a state where your spirit orb or ghost at least appears on film to be on fire, is a fact. That condition may persist into eternity. That condition would be what is commonly referred to as spending the rest of eternity in hell.
Given all of the above, there is a distinct possibility that God is a fact.
Given all of the above, one would be behooved to choose their words carefully here, just in case they themselves are wrong on just about everything that it is possible to be wrong about.
Have a nice day.
Keep in mind the Membership Agreement and do not use personal attacks or insults to argue your point.
Replying to this modbox in thread will be off topic Posted By: Lisa Simpson
As I recall, that exact same south end of a north bound alleged bigfoot, appeared over on cryptomundo, except it was overlaid and woven into a different background. Which of course means that it would be a hoax, that even Biscardi could be proud of.
There is a character that appears to be a bigfoot or someone dressed as one. That is the same as saying the Jaws shark is fact, except sharks do exist.
Spending a least part of your life after death, is a state where your spirit orb or ghost at least appears on film to be on fire, is a fact. That condition may persist into eternity. That condition would be what is commonly referred to as spending the rest of eternity in hell.
Given all of the above, one would be behooved to choose their words carefully here, just in case they themselves are wrong on just about everything that it is possible to be wrong about.
There is a character that appears to be a bigfoot or someone dressed as one. That is the same as saying the Jaws shark is fact, except sharks do exist.
Proof?
It is the lack of belief.
Proof?
Evidence? (I'm getting tired of writing proof)
Evidence?
Evidence?
If you mean dust motes captured on camera and mis-identified, then yes.
Verifiable evidence?
Where is your proof?
No, there isn't.
If we are wrong, prove it using verifiable facts, proof, evidence.
Step 1. Get off lazy arse
Step 2. Find courage
Step 3. Go to dark forest after midnight with flash digital camera
Step 4 Listen
Step 5. Take pictures
Step 6. Run like hell out of there.
Step 1. Get off lazy arse
Step 2. Find courage
Step 3. Go to dark forest after midnight with flash digital camera
Step 4 Listen
Step 5. Take pictures
Step 6. Run like hell out of there.
That is your best proof...this totally lame camp fire story about the spooky forest? This is hardly proof of anything, other then your lack of supporting your obviously false claims/lies.
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
