kitakaze
Resident DJ/NSA Supermole
Melissa to kitakaze said:
I fully understand how my post came across. As I said, I had thought some might share my exasperation. If thefirstbillyjack was the one who posted the video, I might not have made the facepalm comments and reworded the search-and-flee comment. I understand that you want to ensure your board is insults and bashing. I don't necessarily think that my comments are so offensive or going to be detrimental to Bigfoot researchers but that is just my opinion. I really would hope that Bigfoot searchers such as yourself would take the same stance in addressing such silliness as me but I understand you have a different philosophy based on your experiences. Mikeyx is an admin at your board and I note that he often very readily points out ridiculous behaviour by some of the weirder elements of Bigfootery. Obviously you must have some appreciation for sentiments like mine.
A note about the last sentence I bolded there. It is my opinion that you are sometimes overly defensive when addressing me. I have never said or implied you are stupid. You may be tempted to operate from the belief that it is my sole purpose to make anyone who even remotely considers the existence of Bigfoot look like utter buffoons. Please understand this is not the case. I think my discussions with Vortigern99 here are a good example of the support and good rapport I can have with people that have argued for Bigfoot's existence. This is my natural reaction towards people who demonstrate intellectual honesty and a desire to put a pursuit of the truth ahead of fondness for what is a very cool concept (Bigfoot existing).
OK, I think I understand better now. You may think I interpreted your posts as supporting the idea that maybe the video depicted a baby Bigfoot. Actually, the way I interpreted your post is that you seemed to realize it was a porcupine from the beginning. If you check what I wrote here that will become self-evident.
We both agree that critical thinking needs to be encouraged more. I think it takes very little critical thinking to come to the conclusion that the video shows a porcupine. You stated that the video depicted what looked to you like brow ridges but you also considered it might be only light and shadow. I think the latter would be correct. Personally I haven't been able to make out the brow ridge feature you spoke of. I think it would be helpful detail exactly how I examined this alleged piece of sasquatch evidence.
Within the first ten seconds of watching the videos I observed a few things. I immediately knew I was looking at a known animal. I first thought that the blur was very strange and wondered if it was intentional but realized it was just a result of the camera being zoomed. I wondered at first if I might be looking at a raccoon with its head obscured while sleeping due to the lack of prominent quills. Then, when it moved at 00:53, I realized I was looking at a large, tree dwelling rodent. Furthermore, it didn't seem right to me as it would be strange for a nocturnal raccoon to be sleeping out in the open sun on a branch like that in the middle of the day.
I decided the first thing to do was check out porcupine images in trees on youtube. The first video I found looked exactly like the "baby Bigfoot" video. Then I knew I was definitely looking at a porcupine. After further research I discovered that porcupines were indeed in Banning State Park in Minnesota where the video was shot and that not only do they have the long tails mentioned but also in the winter there fur can grow to obscure the quills. Case closed. Hello porcupine. The fact that anyone might think it was a baby Bigfoot is ridiculous to me. I'm not saying you were giving the idea any serious thought. Personally, if it was my board, I would present the video asking people to discuss why anyone would ever think the easily determined porcupine was a baby Bigfoot. I think we both agree that it was a good opportunity to excercise critical thinking.
I also enjoy posting at your board. I'm sorry if I come off as overly acerbic. I have no intention of making fun of you. I appreciate the apology and the leniency you referred to. Obviously, I deserve no special treatment and will restrain the acerbicness when I return.
Here is a link to the thread where Creekfreak posted the Bigfoot enthusiast report:
http://searchforbigfoot.org/index.php?showtopic=1266
And here is wiki's entry on porcupines:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Porcupine
Last edited:
... 
....oh Great and Powerful Kaaz....I didn't say anything about these pieces of evidence, in my post.
