The Shrike
Philosopher
Why didn't you charge the beast for science?
I did, but if there was something still there, I couldn't see it.
Why didn't you charge the beast for science?
I was banned from Bullets threads, you checked on it and couldnt figure out why, The next day I got access back. I am not saying you did it, I think BM locked me out of his forum section.
That is an accurate description of our perception of this event, yes.
Do you think a meaningful percentage of people would not have been drawn to a Bigfoot inquiry but instead would go for ghost/spirit or interdimensional visitor/extraterrestrial?
Or, most would go straight for a Bigfoot theory?
Owlsquatch (c)
Owlsquatch (c)
NOT!Rorschachsquatch > Owlsquatch.![]()
OK, I see what you are talking about. But I wonder if the tail should be more fanned.
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5134/5544777164_e6b8084019.jpg
Beats me, but that doesn't mean it literally disappeared. It could've climbed a tree or stood motionless. For all I know it was standing there, unmoving, and just out of sight.But how did it walk or run away without making the same sounds it did when it walked up to you?
I'm thinking a big survey would probably show more alien and ghost belief than bigfoot belief, but context matters with a potential encounter. If someone hears footfalls in an old creaky house, that's a ghost. If someone hears footfalls in the dark in a densely forested area, that's bigfoot. (Aliens have silent footsteps, everybody knows that.)Do you think more people believe that Bigfoot exists as compared to those who believe in the paranormal entities?
I'm not seeing anatomy consistent with an owl... my working hypothesis is something like a moth
If that's a bigfoot then we can all agree that Patty wasn't one, right?
I'm not seeing anatomy consistent with a moth.