Moderated Bigfoot- Anybody Seen one?

[sugarb]

No, you didn't give me the impression that they were rude. I'm saying that your departure from BFF was a non sequiter. IOW, it doesn't make sense why you stopped conversing with the Bigfooters at BFF. You say it was because "your Bigfoot" wasn't like "their Bigfoot". But that isn't even true. You never even gave anyone a chance to say something like "Gosh, your road runner thing doesn't really sound like a Bigfoot". No, in fact, listing the physical characteristics as above (7'+, fully hairy body, running biped) - I would bet anything that virtually all of the Bigfooters would have insisted that you did see a Bigfoot. It would make no difference if you said it was more ape-like than human-like or vice-versa. A nocturnal seven foot hairy running biped is going to be Bigfoot as far as they are concerned.

William Parcher, perhaps they would have immediately confirmed it was a "bigfoot" as far as they were concerned, but I was trying to *not* automatically see it as a "bigfoot". It was something, it was alive...it was on two legs, but, it *could have been* something else. Like I said, I'm not a "bigfooter". I more consider the probability that it *was* something else, but have been unable to dismiss the possibility that it could have been what is commonly referred to as a bigfoot. Maybe that doesn't make sense.

Oh, and Vortigern99, I hadn't considered a hoaxer but yes, there's no way I could dismiss that possibility either. (Sorry, forgot to add that)

 

[decojuicer]

The hallucination, that's an interesting one, and there is one possibility that I have considered. At first I dismissed it because, as I said, we both saw it. In fact, we both at the same time acknowledged what we were seeing. However...given the recognition recently of other problems, I did a few days ago start wondering about the possibility of my husband simply...I guess you'd say "humoring" what I said I saw. I find it unlikely, given that we both acknowledged it and I actually tried to explain it away immediately...and I have asked him if that's what he was doing and he denies it...but...I know him and he wouldn't do anything that he would think might cause me to further question myself, so that is a possibility that I won't dismiss, yes.

Here is another thought. During a crime scene investigation, the most important thing that first responders have to do is to separate the witnesses and contain the scene.

The reason for this is that witnesses will actually convince each other of what they saw. One witness sees a white male in a red shirt and blue jeans that committed the crime. Another witness believes that he saw a Hispanic male in a blue shirt and tan pants commit the crime. By the time that they are done talking, the suspect becomes a Hispanic male wearing a red shirt and tan pants. It doesn't matter who is actually right, the point is that they convince each other of what they didn't see. They actually become so convinced that they can take a polygraph and answer the questions "truthfully".

In many relationships, the person with the stronger personality will often be the one to dictate what was seen. If you believe that you saw a bigfoot and your husband wasn't sure what he saw, then he might readily agree with you because your assertion is so strong. The thought might be, "Well, I did see something, but I'm not sure what I saw, but she is sure what she saw, so she must have gotten a clearer view.

It only takes a few moments for those beliefs to solidify, and after that, they can be unshakable.

 

[William Parcher]

Bears don't really run on their hind legs, if anything it might look like a hurried walk if they tried to move quickly bipedally. But an upright bear that is only 10 feet away walking towards you and fully illuminated by headlamps is still going to look like an upright bear.

How long did you actually have your eyeballs on it? Did you turn your head or rotate in your seat to look at it as it was alongside and then behind the vehicle?

 

[sugarb]

Here is another thought. During a crime scene investigation, the most important thing that first responders have to do is to separate the witnesses and contain the scene.

The reason for this is that witnesses will actually convince each other of what they saw. One witness sees a white male in a red shirt and blue jeans that committed the crime. Another witness believes that he saw a Hispanic male in a blue shirt and tan pants commit the crime. By the time that they are done talking, the suspect becomes a Hispanic male wearing a red shirt and tan pants. It doesn't matter who is actually right, the point is that they convince each other of what they didn't see. They actually become so convinced that they can take a polygraph and answer the questions "truthfully".

In many relationships, the person with the stronger personality will often be the one to dictate what was seen. If you believe that you saw a bigfoot and your husband wasn't sure what he saw, then he might readily agree with you because your assertion is so strong. The thought might be, "Well, I did see something, but I'm not sure what I saw, but she is sure what she saw, so she must have gotten a clearer view.

It only takes a few moments for those beliefs to solidify, and after that, they can be unshakable.

Decojuicer, hello. That is true! In our relationship, he is definitely the stronger personality though...I'm a fairly insecure person...but yes, you described better than I could what I'd been recently thinking about. Wondering about, I guess. Thank you.

 

[sugarb]

Bears don't really run on their hind legs, if anything it might look like a hurried walk if they tried to move quickly bipedally. But an upright bear that is only 10 feet away walking towards you and fully illuminated by headlamps is still going to look like an upright bear.

How long did you actually have your eyeballs on it? Did you turn your head or rotate in your seat to look at it as it was alongside and then behind the vehicle?

William Parcher, I would doubt it was even a full minute. I would say that it felt longer than that, but I think that's probably a common sense that unusual things seem to last longer than they actually do. I was in the passenger seat, with my seatbelt on, but yes, I did sort of rotate my body (not fully) as it came up alongside the vehicle and saw it veer over to the ditchline on the opposite side of the road (drivers side).

I was *not*, by the way, wearing my glasses, which I do need to drive, and I'll right away admit that I cannot see long distances without them. From the front, I could because of the illumination (though I couldn't see it clearly). From the rear, when it was to the side and behind, my vision wouldn't allow me to see very far at all. Once it went down the ditchline, that was it for me.

ETA: when a passenger, I only wear my glasses when watching for a correct turnoff or sign, and then I take them off again. This is only relevant because we stopped to make sure we were not lost, and so I *had* had my glasses on. Sometimes after taking them off my vision is a bit blurrier than usual, just to fully disclose. I don't have good vision.

 

[decojuicer]

By the way, they do make Ghillie suits with smaller threads. In fact, many hunters will make their own Ghillie suits in order to blend in better with their environment. Camoflauge isn't something you buy, it's something that you do.

ETA: By the way, if you ever saw me coming out of the woods after a long day of hunting, you might think I was a bigfoot. Tired, shoulders slumped, walking with a different gait because of all of the crap that I am wearing, I'm 6'1" and over 300lbs, it's dark, and you're moving quickly. When I'm walking a road, I always step off the road when the car gets close, because I don't want to get hit by a careless driver. I find that having a few thick trees between them and me gives me a sense of security. So when you add all of these things up, I could very well be misconstrued as a bigfoot. Go back and watch the video that I linked to earlier in this thread. That guy might be taken for a bigfoot in broad daylight in the middle of a grocery store. He inadvertently hoaxed a bunch of people.

 

[snoop_doxie]

But you were never in the Army. Your Army camp Bigfoot sighting is a complete fabrication. The duck hunting Bigfoot sighting is a complete fabrication too.

If anyone wants to know what entirely fictitious Bigfoot encounters sound like, look like, smell like, and feel like - they can check out your posts here and on the BFF. How can you tell when somebody is lying about their Bigfoot encounter? Check out Longtabber PE for your example. Uh oh. Pretty tough to distinguish from a real Bigfoot encounter, eh?

No, not difficult to distinguish at all, and it never was difficult. There are no real Bigfoot encounters. You see... Bigfoot does not exist.

Wow, William Parcher, i was sure taken for a fool. i believed longtabber.

I was a dependent, a family member, and active duty for eight years in the Army.

My father was an infantry officer who served two tours in Viet Nam.

My mother was an Army nurse who had two years active duty and six years in the reserves.

The paternal side of my family covers every branch of the United States military.

My father, grandfather, two great uncles, and a great aunt whom i was named after are buried in Arlington National Cemetary.

For this imposter to come here and spout his non-knowledge from his "sandbox" is the lowest of the low.

He disgraces every real soldier, sailor and marine with his lies. Looks like over on Bullshido, they will pin him down like the bug he is. dammit.

 

[kitakaze]

I've read along...but I cannot help but feel foolish, kitakaze. This past year, I've been dealing with some deaths and then some anxiety and panic disorders, so...it may sound strange, but I really couldn't afford to let my mind get too deep into this. I'm handling things better now, and I've been following along on this thread and others, and really your posts are why I finally worked the nerve up to bring this up.

It is no secret elsewhere on the forum that I had problems thereafter that led to being forced to the hospital and now being under care.

Sugar, ideally, I would go deep into the details you have posted about your account with the road runner, as WP called it. I'd post great big posts full of links, reports, studies, charts, what have you. The thing is that I'm having a hard time with devoting the time and effort that such research takes due to certain socio factors. Let me be blunt, I'm thinking about the possibility of you either making everything up or just deluding yourself. I don't want to embarrass you by posting quotes here in this thread, but I am going to clue in other people as to where my reservations are coming from. Some of that is from your post here.

The other thing is that while you said you felt foolish, it still doesn't make sense to me that as person would come into a conversation in February 2009 and talk about how they don't think Bigfoot would often use roads and not drop the bomb that HFS, my husband and I saw one running towards us while driving and I was ten feet away from it. I'm not saying I'm dismissing you, but here is what I'm looking at...

- HFS, Bigfoot is real.

- Bigfoot lives in Arkansas.

- Bigfoots hang around roads in Arkansas.

- Bigfoots cross roads in Arkansas.

- Bigfoot actually gets on the road and starts running down it, showing total disinterest in a large motor vehicle with noise and bright lights bearing down on it.

- Bigfoot did that gob-smackingly amazing thing and was seen by a person who has a inauspiciously has a history of getting delirious.

You see where I'm coming from right?

What I need for you to do before I get all over this thing is tell me exactly what you saw, such as the face, and where you saw it. I want you to tell me enough detail that I can go and show people this place from overhead on Google.

Most importantly, your husband (ex?). I would like with the claim of two witnesses to hear from the other witness. How about having your husband register an account here at the JREF and talk to us. We would need to verify that it is not you making a sock, which might be harder if you live with your husband. That would certainly start getting my motivation running for researching your claim in detail. Right now I'm feeling like I don't want to give time that could be in the pool for a claim that may not even need to be looked into deeply.

 

[kitakaze]

For this imposter to come here and spout his non-knowledge from his "sandbox" is the lowest of the low.

He disgraces every real soldier, sailor and marine with his lies. Looks like over on Bullshido, they will pin him down like the bug he is. dammit.

That is some nutty stuff. All that time with all those unreadable usenet style posts and PM's talking about busting Bill Munns and completely making up deep, deep foo foo about being in the military and seeing Bigfoot. I PMed Longtabber some time ago to get his words on what I thought might have been a mistake by Joey Donuts, whom I also know, and I had no response. Then I saw in a PM from someone else the proof that he was making it all up. I know he saw the PM because...

LONGTABBER PE
Graduate Poster

Last Activity: 5th October 2009 08:56 AM

Dude liked to make deep foo foo.

Bigfoot encounter?



Military spec ops?



Elaborate bull$#!%?



Longtabber, why, man? Why?

 

[9/11 Chewy Defense]

Hi, I'm Chewy! I'm must be here so I must be a Bigfoot!

Naw, I'm kiddin!

 

[snoop_doxie]

That is some nutty stuff. All that time with all those unreadable usenet style posts and PM's talking about busting Bill Munns and completely making up deep, deep foo foo about being in the military and seeing Bigfoot. I PMed Longtabber some time ago to get his words on what I thought might have been a mistake by Joey Donuts, whom I also know, and I had no response. Then I saw in a PM from someone else the proof that he was making it all up. I know he saw the PM because...

LONGTABBER PE
Graduate Poster

Last Activity: 5th October 2009 08:56 AM

Dude liked to make deep foo foo.

Bigfoot encounter?



Military spec ops?



Elaborate bull$#!%?



Longtabber, why, man? Why?

Yes, why? Of course, it seems obvious now. Who would have the time to write all that crap on a battlefield? Man, I was never on a battlefield, but just training some new lieutenants, I was busy all the time. Bigfoot discussions? Uh, no. Longtabber is now on my expungement list.

 

[kitakaze]

Hi, I'm Chewy! I'm must be here so I must be a Bigfoot!

Naw, I'm kiddin!

Man, quit yo jibba jabba!

Everybody knows Chewie is dead.

Anakin calculated Dobido would collide with Sernpidal in seven hours. This event, unbeknownst to them, was a result of the Yuuzhan Vong tactic, Yo'gand's Core. As the winds picked up, Anakin was knocked into the distance, causing Chewie to run after him. Chewie was able to bring Anakin to safety on the Falcon, but another blast of wind knocked him out of reach. Anakin piloted the Falcon, while his father stood on the entrance ramp hoping to lift Chewie up, but was forced to flee from Sernpidal when he realized it was too late to save Chewie. The Wookiee stood in the moon's trajectory, howling defiantly, and was crushed to death with those Sernpidalians who could not escape. His death drove Han to a resentment of his son Anakin. Han eventually recovered and forgave his son, but the death of his battle-brother and dearest companion would stick with him forever.

http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Chewbacca

And it's Chewie, not "Chewy". Chewy is something I did in the dirt with my Kuwahara BMX when I was a kid.

 

[sugarb]

Sugar, ideally, I would go deep into the details you have posted about your account with the road runner, as WP called it. I'd post great big posts full of links, reports, studies, charts, what have you. The thing is that I'm having a hard time with devoting the time and effort that such research takes due to certain socio factors. Let me be blunt, I'm thinking about the possibility of you either making everything up or just deluding yourself. I don't want to embarrass you by posting quotes here in this thread, but I am going to clue in other people as to where my reservations are coming from. Some of that is from your post here.

The other thing is that while you said you felt foolish, it still doesn't make sense to me that as person would come into a conversation in February 2009 and talk about how they don't think Bigfoot would often use roads and not drop the bomb that HFS, my husband and I saw one running towards us while driving and I was ten feet away from it. I'm not saying I'm dismissing you, but here is what I'm looking at...

- HFS, Bigfoot is real.

- Bigfoot lives in Arkansas.

- Bigfoots hang around roads in Arkansas.

- Bigfoots cross roads in Arkansas.

- Bigfoot actually gets on the road and starts running down it, showing total disinterest in a large motor vehicle with noise and bright lights bearing down on it.

- Bigfoot did that gob-smackingly amazing thing and was seen by a person who has a inauspiciously has a history of getting delirious.

You see where I'm coming from right?

What I need for you to do before I get all over this thing is tell me exactly what you saw, such as the face, and where you saw it. I want you to tell me enough detail that I can go and show people this place from overhead on Google.

Most importantly, your husband (ex?). I would like with the claim of two witnesses to hear from the other witness. How about having your husband register an account here at the JREF and talk to us. We would need to verify that it is not you making a sock, which might be harder if you live with your husband. That would certainly start getting my motivation running for researching your claim in detail. Right now I'm feeling like I don't want to give time that could be in the pool for a claim that may not even need to be looked into deeply.

My breakdown earlier this year...for anyone that didn't follow the link.

Yeah. Can I ask why you think that means I am deluding myself? I told you earlier, it was no secret. Yes...that is very insulting. You think I'm crazy. Thanks.

By the way, I don't have "a history of getting delirious". I did not have those problems until watching my mom die, but again, thanks. Nice assumption. Nice phrasing. Nice misleading. And the "critical thought" in that is where, exactly???

Yes, I understand. Completely.

 

[WGBH]

Sugarb,

You said you had been reading this thread. This caught you by surprise?

 

[kitakaze]

My breakdown earlier this year...for anyone that didn't follow the link.

Yeah. Can I ask why you think that means I am deluding myself? I told you earlier, it was no secret. Yes...that is very insulting. You think I'm crazy. Thanks.

By the way, I don't have "a history of getting delirious". I did not have those problems until watching my mom die, but again, thanks. Nice assumption. Nice phrasing. Nice misleading. And the "critical thought" in that is where, exactly???

Yes, I understand. Completely.

Sugar, I'm sorry for offending you. That was not my intention. Also, I offer you my deepest condolences for the untimely passing of your mother. I recently had a loss in my immediate family, as well.

I really don't want to bring up the ugly details of your mental breakdown here, but suffice it to say, you are not crazy. Your breakdown earlier this year would acurately be called becoming delirious. You were in a severe mental state due to chemical imbalances and other factors related to stress and anxiety. That sucks. Many millions of people battle against anxiety disorders and they are not crazy.

The thing is that I think you're understanding enough to see what some of the initial doubts might be. Road runner Bigfoot in Arkansas is quite a thing to contemplate. I want to eliminate to my satisfaction that you aren't making anything up. That isn't meant to insult you, it's just a matter of course with a claim such as yours. You can understand that, yes? I would like to get on with really getting into researching your claim. I would like to get a few things going first.

How about talking to the second witness? How about getting me location details so I can pinpoint the are I will study? How about giving me a detailed description of what you saw and what you were doing before and after the event?

Again, I apologize, but my critical thinking is fine. People make up elaborate things and we've seen it here countless times from people who seem very rational. If you are telling the truth, I want to help you find some answers.

 

[sugarb]

Sugarb,

You said you had been reading this thread. This caught you by surprise?

WGBH, no, not really. I do find it insulting...particularly the last little parting shot about how he'd have to prove I wouldn't create a "sock puppet" since I, shock of all shocks, LIVE with my husband. And people wonder why these threads go bad? And why someone would be very hesitant to take part? I guess it did surprise me in that after the warning about these threads I figured it might be a different atmosphere. I was wrong. I admit that too when it happens (which is often).

Thank you, though, WGBH. I don't know why he implied that my husband was an "ex" either. My "ex" is dead. So that was another lovely little nicety.

What surprised me, as if it matters, is that it is pretty clear that no matter how honest a person is about anything and everything that may raise questions, it will be forever held against them and automatically make anything they say pointless.

I know that if I played this game...and my husband wants to register by the way, but he'd just be suspended immediately LOL...my husband would just be called my delirious sock puppet and then it would be demanded that we find another computer in another house and post simultaneously to "prove" something that would make whatever worth whoevers time.

(and *I'm* paranoid?)

The funny part of this is, my husband is the one that encouraged me to finally post about this. I told him I was afraid to, that it would be stupid to, especially because I've freely talked about my other problems, but HE said that the people here would understand those things. So I thought...maybe.

At any rate, there's nothing else to add anyway. I was going to mention a discussion we had tonight on our way to visit relatives and a slight difference in our memory of it, but what's the point?

No, I guess I'm not surprised...but then again I am, too. (you like that? See? My multiple personalities that don't exist refuse to agree!)Eh, doesn't matter.

 

[kitakaze]

Sugarb,

You said you had been reading this thread. This caught you by surprise?

Eliminating circumstances such seeing things that aren't actually there or a person making things up or embellishing them is a matter of course. As a person who calls themselves an investigator, you really should be more diligent about this than the average person. In your case, there has been not a single reason to dismiss any of the strong indicators of a sleep-related experience when you were a teenager. Why would my mind create Bigfoot? is certainly not one of them.

In Sugar's case, we're just getting started and removing the issue of lying is important. Should we be lax or something? She says there is a second witness and that it is her husband. Does he not live with her? Are his fingers broken and he can't sit down and type? Sugar mentioned a divorce but I think she also mentioned being currently married. Do you want to take a crack at this? Be my guest. Shall we adopt the cool-story-I-believe-you method? I would think that a person with personal experience of hoaxing would be more judicious.

 

[kitakaze]

WGBH, no, not really. I do find it insulting...particularly the last little parting shot about how he'd have to prove I wouldn't create a "sock puppet" since I, shock of all shocks, LIVE with my husband. And people wonder why these threads go bad? And why someone would be very hesitant to take part? I guess it did surprise me in that after the warning about these threads I figured it might be a different atmosphere. I was wrong. I admit that too when it happens (which is often).

Thank you, though, WGBH. I don't know why he implied that my husband was an "ex" either. My "ex" is dead. So that was another lovely little nicety.

What surprised me, as if it matters, is that it is pretty clear that no matter how honest a person is about anything and everything that may raise questions, it will be forever held against them and automatically make anything they say pointless.

I know that if I played this game...and my husband wants to register by the way, but he'd just be suspended immediately LOL...my husband would just be called my delirious sock puppet and then it would be demanded that we find another computer in another house and post simultaneously to "prove" something that would make whatever worth whoevers time.

(and *I'm* paranoid?)

The funny part of this is, my husband is the one that encouraged me to finally post about this. I told him I was afraid to, that it would be stupid to, especially because I've freely talked about my other problems, but HE said that the people here would understand those things. So I thought...maybe.

At any rate, there's nothing else to add anyway. I was going to mention a discussion we had tonight on our way to visit relatives and a slight difference in our memory of it, but what's the point?

No, I guess I'm not surprised...but then again I am, too. (you like that? See? My multiple personalities that don't exist refuse to agree!)Eh, doesn't matter.

Sugar, I don't think I'm being unfair or harsh in any way. Try not to get too defensive and read insults that aren't there. In looking back through some of your posts, I saw a mention of divorce. I did not know if that was in reference to your husband now or someone before. I didn't see anything about your ex being deceased. I did not absorb through osmosis the entirety of knowledge of your 800+ posts since last night. There's a lot about your circumstances I was seeking to clear up. I'm certainly not interested in taking shots at you. You have an incredible story, and it could prove very interesting to look into once we set aside doubts about making it up. People do that.

So you live with your husband and he wants to talk. That's fantastic. This will be the first time we've had multiple credible witnesses here. By all means, please ask your husband to join us here. We have good sock detectors here, and if it is you making a sock, I'm confident we would know. I think you're telling the truth, but let's make sure first. Fair enough?

 

[GT/CS]

Plus, anyone who has followed the bigfoot threads should understand our problem with nonsense posts and posters. And please don't forget that this is a skeptic's site, and there are a number of reasons to be skeptical with this story, so thick skin will be required.

 

[kitakaze]

I know that if I played this game...and my husband wants to register by the way, but he'd just be suspended immediately LOL...my husband would just be called my delirious sock puppet and then it would be demanded that we find another computer in another house and post simultaneously to "prove" something that would make whatever worth whoevers time.

Why would he be immediately suspended? JREF members are not supposed to call other people socks. If we think that to be the case, we report the person and let administration deal with it. You can't be suspended because someone else pointed a finger at you. I can be suspended for your husband registering and me calling him your sock. When Erik Beckjord was still alive and socking here, his last one was active for quite some time while numerous people brought forward various evidence showing that the sock was Beckjord. Admins didn't ban him until they were sure. A married couple being on the JREF and using the same compter is quite normal also. We have lots of people like that here.

Again, please extend my personal invitation to your husband to join us. Don't read it as an insult but rather the most basic request. Say there was two witnesses? Let's talk to two witnesses, yes?