Moderated Bigfoot- Anybody Seen one?

[tsig]

I'm sorry, I think you have mistaken me for someone who cares what you think.

Then why are you posting here? You have mistaken me for someone who cares about your feelings. You saw something that bothered you. Get a life. Why should we take your lies seriously?

 

[tsig]

I don't care what is more reasonable to the general public. I care what is the truth and that would be A.

How much money are you making off the truth?

 

[desertgal]

I don't care what is more reasonable to the general public. I care what is the truth and that would be A.

Okay. We've established that.

Can we end this pointless thread now? It's circular-skeptics offering suggestions and John responding that he saw Bigfoot. I thought, at first, that he might have come here for answers to help with the trauma he suffered, but, since he has rejected every explanation offered, that isn't so. We can't help much with the PTSD, except offer suggestions, whch we have.

John can now tell his friends that he wasn't swayed by the skeptics, which I'm guessing was the intent all along.

I suggest we all request that this thread be closed, or just let it die. We're just chasing our own tails.

 

[WGBH]

Then why are you posting here?

I was asked to answer questions.

 

[WGBH]

How much money are you making off the truth?

Wow, that was stunningly ignorant.

 

[makaya325]

I was thinking the same thing myself, mak, when I read that.

"Flawed observations by eyewitnesses in general' simply doesn't account for many of the Bigfoot sighting reports....because, as in John's case....(and in many other similar cases)....the chance (also known as "probability") that he misidentified a Bear, or a Deer, or a Coyote for a huge, massive, upright walking, human-looking..., awful-smellin' Ape-Man is pretty much zero.

I know what you mean sweaty. Unlike lake monsters and ufo's, which have tons of explanations, Bigfoot doesnt have many.

 

[desertgal]

I know what you mean sweaty. Unlike lake monsters and ufo's, which have tons of explanations, Bigfoot doesnt have many.

Oh, for the love of...

How many explanations do you think there could be in the deep woods? You aren't exactly going to see, say, a weather balloon there.

It's a Bigfoot.
It's a figment of the imagination/trick of the mind
It's an hallucination.
It's a lie.

So, that's three plausible, proven explanations against one mythical one. I'm sure other folks could think of more.

But, since Sweaty is sure that the majority of all those sightings must be Bigfoot, then, please, Sweaty, do share with us the verified proof of Bigfoot that makes that explanation more plausible than any other. We'll wait.

As for the idea that a bear could never be mistaken for a Bigfoot, that is just downright stupid. Obviously, Sweaty hasn't spent too much time in the woods, and has definitely never encountered a bear. As for the idea that intelligence has anything to do with tricks of the mind or that anyone can control the mind to the point that all observations would be 100% accurate, that is just as stupid.

Hell, I knew a guy in the Sierra Nevada Mountains who swore up and down that one dark night, he came out of his tent and saw a Bigfoot in the moonlight. Said it was moving and rustling and he could hear it breathing. Scared him so bad, he ran to his truck and took off. When he and his buddies went back the next day to get his stuff, "Bigfoot" turned out to be a freaking tree, the rustling was squirrels in the pine needles, and the 'breathing' he heard was the wind blowing through a hollow in a dead tree, combined with his own breathing.

Please tell us the "tons" of explanations there are for lake monsters, though.

 

[makaya325]

Oh, for the love of...

How many explanations do you think there could be in the deep woods? You aren't exactly going to see, say, a weather balloon there.

It's a Bigfoot.
It's a figment of the imagination/trick of the mind
It's an hallucination.
It's a lie.

So, that's three plausible, proven explanations against one mythical one. I'm sure other folks could think of more.

But, since Sweaty is sure that the majority of all those sightings must be Bigfoot, then, please, Sweaty, do share with us the verified proof of Bigfoot that makes that explanation more plausible than any other. We'll wait.

As for the idea that a bear could never be mistaken for a Bigfoot, that is just downright stupid. Obviously, Sweaty hasn't spent too much time in the woods, and has definitely never encountered a bear. As for the idea that intelligence has anything to do with tricks of the mind or that anyone can control the mind to the point that all observations would be 100% accurate, that is just as stupid.

Hell, I knew a guy in the Sierra Nevada Mountains who swore up and down that one dark night, he came out of his tent and saw a Bigfoot in the moonlight. Said it was moving and rustling and he could hear it breathing. Scared him so bad, he ran to his truck and took off. When he and his buddies went back the next day to get his stuff, "Bigfoot" turned out to be a freaking tree, the rustling was squirrels in the pine needles, and the 'breathing' he heard was the wind blowing through a hollow in a dead tree, combined with his own breathing.

For all we know, you COULD be making it up

Please tell us the "tons" of explanations there are for lake monsters, though.

Lake monsters: Birds, otters, waves, seiches, boats, sub's, dogs, moose, wakes, logs, rocks, sturgeon, pike, gar, beavers, ducks, snakes, hoaxes, seals, light distortion, etc

Bigfoot: hmm...lets see....Bears (haha), suited humans (Some one clean my key board, bc i spit out my coffee laughing so hard!), Sleep paralysis (That could explain some sightings). Um, thats just about it. Dont try to lump hallucinations with other disorders, please.

 

[desertgal]

For all we know, you COULD be making it up

Yeah, I could. But, I'm not. And not all of us are somewhat less than honest.

Lake monsters: Birds, otters, waves, seiches, boats, sub's, dogs, moose, wakes, logs, rocks, sturgeon, pike, gar, beavers, ducks, snakes, hoaxes, seals, light distortion, etc

Seals? In a lake?

21...yup, that's TONS.

Bigfoot: hmm...lets see....Bears (haha),

Okay. Please provide evidence that proves that not a single Bigfoot sighting was actually bear.

Dont try to lump hallucinations with other disorders, please.

A trick of the mind and imagination are neither physical brain nor mental disorders. Nowhere did I say or suggest that they were.

A disorder is made up of a number of symptoms, not just one. If you don't know that, then don't use the word. And learn how to read a post thoroughly. This isn't the first time you've quoted someone as saying something they did not say.

I have a son with a severe developmental disorder. You might take the use (or misuse) of that word lightly, but I absolutely do not. I would never suggest that a single hallucination, trick of the mind, or figment of imagination meant the person had a physical or mental disorder. If you imply or infer again that I did when I didn't, I have no problem reporting your post as a personal attack.

 

[Vortigern99]

Regional expectation -- a perceptual distortion based on the degree of belief one's local culture places in a given phenomenon -- is another likely contributor to BF sightings. Combine this known and studied phenomenon with sightings of bears, human beings, tree stumps, shadows in the night, and other unidentified objects or animals in the woods, and you have a logical and rational explanation for many BF reports.

Further, as desertgal has noted, hallucination need not be the product of any "disorder". It can result from fatigue, stress, isolation, and/or the state between sleep and waking known as hypnagogia.

Intentional fraud, sometimes involving hair suits, is also a known and documented phenomenon.

So you might wish to add those to your list.

 

[desertgal]

Regional expectation -- a perceptual distortion based on the degree of belief one's local culture places in a given phenomenon -- is another likely contributor to BF sightings. Combine this known and studied phenomenon with sightings of bears, human beings, tree stumps, shadows in the night, and other unidentified objects or animals in the woods, and you have a logical and rational explanation for many BF reports.

Further, as desertgal has noted, hallucination need not be the product of any "disorder". It can result from fatigue, stress, isolation, and/or the state between sleep and waking known as hypnagogia.

Intentional fraud, sometimes involving hair suits, is also a known and documented phenomenon.

So you might wish to add those to your list.

So. Six plausible, proven explanations against one mythical explanation. I dunno, Sweaty...your argument is starting to look kinda weak...

 

[Spektator]

Regional expectation -- a perceptual distortion based on the degree of belief one's local culture places in a given phenomenon -- is another likely contributor to BF sightings. Combine this known and studied phenomenon with sightings of bears, human beings, tree stumps, shadows in the night (snip)...

And not only in the night; Creekfreak's daytime "bigfoot" photo was actually just a picture that included a few twigs showing up against a shadowed background. It was a striking illusion, but clearly only an illusion. Well, to everyone but Creekfreak.

 

[Drewbot]

John, Which of the following scenarios do you think is a more reasonable (to the general public) explanation for your sighting?

A. You saw a Giant, Hairy, Bipedal Primate, of an unclassified, undiscovered nature, and were traumatized by this encounter post-sighting.

B. You were hunting, and tired, and you hallucinated or dreamed that you saw something that resembles what we call Bigfoot.

I don't care what is more reasonable to the general public. I care what is the truth and that would be A.

John, I am not trying to insult you with this line of questioning, I am simply trying to determine if there is a perceived stigma associated with your opinion of what the general public might think of someone who has a hallucination.

Do you believe that someone who has a hallucination should be labeled as 'crazy', or 'nuts'?

Do you believe the general public believes that someone who has a hallucination should be labeled as 'crazy' or 'nuts'?

 

[WGBH]

John, I am not trying to insult you with this line of questioning, I am simply trying to determine if there is a perceived stigma associated with your opinion of what the general public might think of someone who has a hallucination.

Do you believe that someone who has a hallucination should be labeled as 'crazy', or 'nuts'?

Do you believe the general public believes that someone who has a hallucination should be labeled as 'crazy' or 'nuts'?

I have no experience with hallucinations or people who hallucinate, so I cannot answer these questions.

 

[Vortigern99]

But you have eyes and the capacity to read and understand information. Yet you have not examined the known and documented human phenomenon of hallucination, at least not to the point of being able to grasp that it can and does occur as a result of fatigue, isolation, stress -- all of which you've described as elements of your sighting. You've also demonstrated in past posts that you have a bias against people who hallucinate, and/or that you believe others harbor such a bias. You're unwilling to accept the most rational explanation for your sighting, probably because you fear being labeled "insane" either by others in your social group, or by your own limited understanding of and bias against the very phenomenon you probably experienced, namely hypnagogic hallucination.

 

[Correa Neto]

I once saw -and chased for a very brief time- a guinea fowl with two heads (you can use the seach tool to find my "sighting report").

Is this enough of reason to labell me as crazy or nuts?

 

[WGBH]

But you have eyes and the capacity to read and understand information. Yet you have not examined the known and documented human phenomenon of hallucination, at least not to the point of being able to grasp that it can and does occur as a result of fatigue, isolation, stress -- all of which you've described as elements of your sighting. You've also demonstrated in past posts that you have a bias against people who hallucinate, and/or that you believe others harbor such a bias. You're unwilling to accept the most rational explanation for your sighting, probably because you fear being labeled "insane" either by others in your social group, or by your own limited understanding of and bias against the very phenomenon you probably experienced, namely hypnagogic hallucination.

I have read and do understand the information, I just find the evidence in my case lacking for that to have occured. Please supply me the proof of my bias against people who hallucinate, seeing as I don't even know any people who do. I have news for you bud, I am already called insane, it's not that big a deal to me. In fact it has been thrown around here on this thread several times.The most rational explanation would be that I saw what I saw.

 

[Vortigern99]

No, that explanation is irrational, for the simple reason that no logical mechanism exists by which a breeding population of 9-foot tall, hideously odorous primates could have gone undetected by biologists, all while obtaining 10000+ calories a day without the required somatic traits to do so (namely good sniffers or claws for digging), in an area of the eastern US which has been studied and researched for decades, and in which far smaller animals have been catalogued and classified, for 50+ years while people are actively looking for it.

And before you accuse my mind of being closed to the idea, I would like to point out to you that until March or April of this year I was a "believer" in that I harbored an opinion that BF could possibly exist hidden away in the forests of NA -- until I began to follow the links offered to me on this site, until my understanding of the caloric requirements of a bear (the only species that comes close to the size and possible diet of a putative BF) made me realize that no animal could obtain that much nutrition without being noticed by professionals, and until my mind began to carefully and critically examine the likelihood that no bone, no hair, no scat, no DNA and indeed no evidence of any kind could have been left behind by a real and extant animal of this kind.

My mind is not closed to the idea: rather, I have entertained it at length,turned it over to examine it from a number of angles as though it were true; and finally concluded based on logic and an analysis of the facts that it is not tenable, logical, rational, reasonable, or probable.

Show me some evidence, and we'll talk. Until then, the only rational conclusion here is that you either 1) experienced a hallucination which you are unwilling to come to terms with based on its apparently vivid reality; 2) you were hoaxed by a third party wearing a suit, or 3) you are willfully hoaxing us. I don't believe it's 3) as tsig does; I think you're simply mistaken about what you saw and that your mind, for whatever reason, is closed to the possibility of hypnagogia.

 

[WGBH]

1) experienced a hallucination which you are unwilling to come to terms with based on its apparently vivid reality;

That's not what my psychiatrist told me.


2) you were hoaxed by a third party wearing a suit,

Not even a remote possibility. For what possible reason would someone want to hoax me? If someone went to all that trouble and cost, I am sure they would have made sure I got a better look then I did.

or 3) you are willfully hoaxing us. I don't believe it's 3) as tsig does;

Why the heck would I want to hoax the JREF forum? LOL!!!

I think you're simply mistaken about what you saw and that your mind,


for whatever reason, is closed to the possibility of hypnagogia.

yes, pretty much.

 

[kitakaze]

I have no experience with hallucinations or people who hallucinate, so I cannot answer these questions.

Not even beer goggles?