Moderated Bigfoot- Anybody Seen one?

[tsig]

I haven't missed any questions. Why in the world would I answer them here? Over at the BFF, I've answered each and every one put to me because they were done so with the barest modicum of civilization I require for an exchange.

From what I can tell, members of this community think I'm either lying, hoaxing, being hoaxed, prone to hysterics, afraid of the dark, or just plain stupid. The other members of my organization are the same but also include trigger-happy rednecks. Honestly, would any of you wade into such a "discussion" were you in my place?
I am actually very happy to answer questions and am also willing to admit when I don't have an answer or are unable to answer. But you don't want my answers. You want me and my friends to be your pinatas. You want to construe my words to fit your perceived notions. Fine. Go ahead. Enjoy yourselves.

So now, I'm going to leave this conversation and not come back (at least not for a while - maybe never). You will likely attribute that to me cowering from your rapier-like skills of logic and deduction. In reality, it's to stay away from some of the most unpleasant people I've had the misfortune to interact with on the internet. If you want to ask me questions, please feel free to do so over on the BFF.

Cheers.

Well I'd provide proof and enjoy watching my opponents eat crow.

 

[dafydd]

I haven't missed any questions. Why in the world would I answer them here? Over at the BFF, I've answered each and every one put to me because they were done so with the barest modicum of civilization I require for an exchange.

From what I can tell, members of this community think I'm either lying, hoaxing, being hoaxed, prone to hysterics, afraid of the dark, or just plain stupid. The other members of my organization are the same but also include trigger-happy rednecks. Honestly, would any of you wade into such a "discussion" were you in my place?

I am actually very happy to answer questions and am also willing to admit when I don't have an answer or are unable to answer. But you don't want my answers. You want me and my friends to be your pinatas. You want to construe my words to fit your perceived notions. Fine. Go ahead. Enjoy yourselves.

So now, I'm going to leave this conversation and not come back (at least not for a while - maybe never). You will likely attribute that to me cowering from your rapier-like skills of logic and deduction. In reality, it's to stay away from some of the most unpleasant people I've had the misfortune to interact with on the internet. If you want to ask me questions, please feel free to do so over on the BFF.

Cheers.

Is the kitchen too hot for you? Asking for proof is rather unpleasant, isn't it?

 

[Correa Neto]

So much for civility, I don't think they want to hear anything; even if they do, they have already rejected what will be said.

Jodie, don't get me wrong but rejecting one more set of tales about having seen bigfoot is fair, unless solid reliable evidence is provided. It all boils down to show your cards, bluff time is over.

This is one aspect of the problem, civility is another.

If you consider the IPU-knows-how-many unbacked tales, accusations of being close-minded, denialists, government shills, ignorant, nutty ideas, etc. posted by bigfoot proponents here over the years, I think you will understand why some people become quite vocal when one more anecdote is presented, coupled with promisses of outstanding revelations that will ruin our world view and blah blah blah... Its not a matter of agreeing but understanding.

 

[Resume]

So much for civility, I don't think they want to hear anything; even if they do, they have already rejected what will be said.

Nope. If you have something to present, bloody well present it. This goes for footie, ghosts, aliens, psychics . . . all of it. I'm 55 and I've heard it all, personally investigated some, and it's still crickets all the way down.

If you have it to show, show it; if you're just telling, pardon my skepticism. One bigfoot equals my acceptance of bigfoot; one story is just another story.

 

[Castro]

So much for civility, I don't think they want to hear anything; even if they do, they have already rejected what will be said.

Well, as far as I am concerned, "they" think that this story can be summarized by this: "Some footers say they saw bigfoots while looking for bigfoot but don't provide any evidence" and "they" observe that in such case, when challenged about their claims, bigfooters often play the victim card.
"They" hope this post is civil enough.

 

[GT/CS]

So much for civility, I don't think they want to hear anything; even if they do, they have already rejected what will be said.

Jodie,
Who is 'they'?

 

[Jodie]

Gee, Castro, Parn, Tom, ABP, all those that read what they wanted to read into my stated stance. If you won't accept what I have to say about a friend's claim, and I am skeptical, is anyone here going accept what a bigfoot researcher claims?

 

[mikeyx]

Gee, Castro, Parn, Tom, ABP, all those that read what they wanted to read into my stated stance. If you won't accept what I have to say about a friend's claim, and I am a skeptical, is anyone here going accept what a bigfoot researcher claims?

No. the bias is a pollutant.

 

[LTC8K6]

Gee, Castro, Parn, Tom, ABP, all those that read what they wanted to read into my stated stance. If you won't accept what I have to say about a friend's claim, and I am a skeptical, is anyone here going accept what a bigfoot researcher claims?

Well, the title "bigfoot researcher" tends to decrease one's credibility by quite a bit.

 

[Resume]

Gee, Castro, Parn, Tom, ABP, all those that read what they wanted to read into my stated stance. If you won't accept what I have to say about a friend's claim, and I am skeptical, is anyone here going accept what a bigfoot researcher claims?

No. the bias is a pollutant.

Yep. Trot out the monkey. Seems simple since so many are sure they've seen 'em and know where they live.

 

[Castro]

Gee, Castro, Parn, Tom, ABP, all those that read what they wanted to read into my stated stance. If you won't accept what I have to say about a friend's claim, and I am skeptical, is anyone here going accept what a bigfoot researcher claims?

Care to quote me to prove that? FYI, I don't think your friend is "lying". I think she filled many blanks to finally see what she dreamed to see for a long time and probably with a little help from someone.IMO.

ETA: and as I said before, for me, and as I'm not emotionally involved, it's just another footers story amongst many: footers say they saw bigfoots while looking for bigfoot. No evidence provided. End of the story.

 

[captain koolaid]

...From what I can tell, members of this community think I'm either lying...

I'd like to think you're not lying. You seem like a stand up guy. But, hey, it's Bigfoot. It happens. Remember the Carter/Green thing, etc?

...hoaxing, being hoaxed...

Yes. One or the other.

...prone to hysterics, afraid of the dark, or just plain stupid...

Definitely not any of those things. But, something's not right. Damn it, man, this is the Bigfoot brass ring. Go for it, already.

...The other members of my organization are the same but also include trigger-happy rednecks...

Well, I don't think so. Trigger happy rednecks would have brought home the Bigfoot bacon, by now. You guys seem to know what you're doing.

...Honestly, would any of you wade into such a "discussion" were you in my place?...

If I was lying, definitely not. If I wasn't, probably not.

...I am actually very happy to answer questions and am also willing to admit when I don't have an answer or are unable to answer. But you don't want my answers. You want me and my friends to be your pinatas...

The answers are wanted. But, I get the pinata thing.

...So now, I'm going to leave this conversation and not come back (at least not for a while - maybe never). You will likely attribute that to me cowering from your rapier-like skills of logic and deduction. In reality, it's to stay away from some of the most unpleasant people I've had the misfortune to interact with on the internet. If you want to ask me questions, please feel free to do so over on the BFF...

I hope you change your mind.

...Cheers.

Rock on, dude. BTW- I love the podcasts. Very enteratining. No, that's not sarcasm.

 

[AttorneyTom]

Gosh .. the stuff I miss when I am sitting in a classroom all day to update my knowledge about poverty law...

"Bigfoot Researcher " ? What ??? The animal would have to exist to research it ! I mean Cardboard Box Researcher.. I can understand that.. This is why some of us are skeptical about your skepticism, Jo.

Plus they just show up on the threads after .. well.. like I said before.

 

[Jodie]

After what Tom? What is it ? Go ahead and spit it out.

 

[RayG]

One bigfoot equals my acceptance of bigfoot; one story is just another story.

Hammer, meet nail.

RayG

 

[Jodie]

Care to quote me to prove that? FYI, I don't think your friend is "lying". I think she filled many blanks to finally see what she dreamed to see for a long time and probably with a little help from someone.IMO.

ETA: and as I said before, for me, and as I'm not emotionally involved, it's just another footers story amongst many: footers say they saw bigfoots while looking for bigfoot. No evidence provided. End of the story.

My apologies, I think we are on the same page as far as what I think any of them are experiencing out there.

 

[mikeyx]

Gosh .. the stuff I miss when I am sitting in a classroom all day to update my knowledge about poverty law...

"Bigfoot Researcher " ? What ??? The animal would have to exist to research it ! I mean Cardboard Box Researcher.. I can understand that.. This is why some of us are skeptical about your skepticism, Jo.

Plus they just show up on the threads after .. well.. like I said before.

This is as bad as Parcher's scenario, a very speciific scenario of a group of hoaxers along side the TBRC, and while everyone in this thread demands evidence of Bipto's side of the equasion, noone demands any evidence of Parcher's. They just take it as fact. How one sided can you be?

Show us the monkey? fair enough.
For He who has never been there, prove thye hoaxers are there. Just as fair a demand. Now make it happen.

 

[Resume]

This is as bad as Parcher's scenario, a very speciific scenario of a group of hoaxers along side the TBRC, and while everyone in this thread demands evidence of Bipto's side of the equasion, noone demands any evidence of Parcher's. They just take it as fact. How one sided can you be?

Show us the monkey? fair enough.
For He who has never been there, prove thye hoaxers are there. Just as fair a demand. Now make it happen.

I've seen bigfoot hoaxes, even been a part of one of sorts, but I've never seen a footie. Being that there is no credible objective evidence for this creature, and there is plenty for hoaxing, I think Sir Bill of Ockham would say we're good here.

 

[mikeyx]

I've seen bigfoot hoaxes, even been a part of one of sorts, but I've never seen a footie. Being that there is no credible objective evidence for this creature, and there is plenty for hoaxing, I think Sir Bill of Ockham would say we're good here.

Fraid not. He made specific claims on the same tonal level as area x and claimed there was a team of hoaxers. Where the proof. I want proof of parcher's claims. Does he know or did he make it up

Good for the goose and all that and he put it out there. Is just as fair a demand.

 

[AlaskaBushPilot]

This is as bad as Parcher's scenario, a very speciific scenario of a group of hoaxers along side the TBRC, and while everyone in this thread demands evidence of Bipto's side of the equasion, noone demands any evidence of Parcher's. They just take it as fact. How one sided can you be?

Show us the monkey? fair enough.
For He who has never been there, prove thye hoaxers are there. Just as fair a demand. Now make it happen.

Standard hoaxer "blame the victim" stance. The hoaxers conceal the location and other evidence, then blame the targets of the hoax for it. You should be asking Bipto on BFF for the exact location, list of participants, confirmation of the property owner, etc. - but you won't. I take it nobody on the BFF has even bothered to ask the location. If that doesn't speak volumes, nothing does.

In those tapes offered as "evidence" on the TBRC site for 2011, what you hear is loud cicadas and an occasional noise, the loudest two of which sound very much like metal objects contracting in the cold. My five-gallon metal gas cans make amazingly loud noises at night, and again expanding during the day.

I'm still open-minded about the exact location - I might not have located section 5 correctly, and they may not have been telling the truth about the property owner, just like not telling the truth about how far from roads and houses the site is. There is no place in the entire state that is 20 miles or more from a house.

Here is the population density map for Oklahoma:

Observe that there actually is an area in Oklahoma with a population density of less than one person per square mile - in the extreme NW of the panhandle. In Southeastern Oklahoma, the most sparsely populated areas of the Oachita National Forest still has between 1-10 people per square mile.

You cannot truthfully say that nobody lives for 20-30 miles. The person who is making this easily disproven statement is also in charge of concealing all the other important evidence.

From the tapes, these sound like people that don't need anyone to hoax them. They hear a sound in the night and they're making recordings of themselves cowering inside. Brian Brown asked this question of his own group: "why didn't you look out the window". He claimed they can't. That is trivially untrue.

Can't look out the window.