Moderated Bigfoot- Anybody Seen one?

Status
Not open for further replies.
I would say the internet folks are more vulnerable to hoaxes. Remember how all the internet Bigfoot sites crashed on Georgia Hoax weekend August 2008?
 
"Internet folks" are people with access to the Internet?

Those without any web access are not likely to be fooled by Bigfoot stories? Would it go something like this?...

Web Pete: "Hey Dave, I just heard they got a Bigfoot body in Georgia and it's gonna be on the news."

Webless Dave: "Nope, I'm not believing it, Pete. There ain't no Bigfoot anywhere."
 
I was able to view BFF (unregistered guest) for a period of time when there were enormous numbers of visitors on that day. Everything was slow to react and page-turning took minutes. Then later they did various things to help themselves by restricting what non-members could access or see - like removing the "who's online" feature at the bottom, removing avatars, removing the search function and then finally barring the site access by anyone not a registered member. After the flood, they restored everything for non-members except search function and avatar view. To this day, folks like me cannot use their search or see any avatars.
 
Drewbot said:
The use of the term 'Woo', is referring someone who believes in something without legitimate science supporting that belief. Being that is impossible for me to find evidence supporting my belief that Bigfoot does not exist, 'Woo' can not apply to me.
Click to expand...

You did have some sort of sighting that you believed at the time was of a sasquatch, right? So then you would be called a "Former-Woo"? "Post-Woo?" "Recovering Woo-aholic"? "I could be called a Woo yesterday, but I cannot be called Woo today"? "Woo's on first?"

William Parcher said:
Bigfoot hoaxers fascinate me and I have many unanswered questions about them. Can they be stereotyped or categorized in any ways? Why do they do it? Are they believers or skeptics?

Questions don't get answered mainly because we have no (or little) direct information from the hoaxers themselves. You can read hundreds of stories concerning "here's why I think I saw a Bigfoot" or "here's why I think these are Bigfoot tracks". But where can I read stories like "here's why I lied about seeing a Bigfoot" or "here's why I made some fake Bigfoot tracks"? I want to hear what motivates the hoaxers in their own words.

If Bigfoot belief or witness sets a person up for ridicule and social ostracism... then why would anyone falsely claim (hoax) a belief or the evidence? Is it that the grief and troubles that BF believers face is actually overstated?

Have people always guessed or known that submitting false sighting reports (pure fiction) to Green, BFRO, etc. simply doesn't put yourself at any real and meaningful risk?
Click to expand...

From what I gathered from a Wallace family member, the reasoning behind it was the joy of pulling pranks and watching people's reactions.
 
William Parcher said:
Eliminating names or name-calling (woo, scoftic, etc.) doesn't really change anything when it comes to the actual nuts and bolts of the debate. The believers still can't prove they are right, and the skeptics cannot either.
Click to expand...

Well it would eliminate the huge detours these threads on this subject take and raise the level of maturity of the discussion. I have to be honest, I have to skim most of these threads and find it takes a lot more effort to skip the personal shtuff to find anything of real value.
 
wolftrax said:
From what I gathered from a Wallace family member, the reasoning behind it was the joy of pulling pranks and watching people's reactions.
Click to expand...


I believe that. But only certain kinds of reactions would provide much entertainment for the Wallaces. I wonder how they would feel if the local news headline and gossip was "Huge Fake Footprints Found - Chuckles All Around and All Wonder as to Who is Responsible for the Prank"

Bigfoot hoaxes kinda fall flat when folks are skeptical and have no reason to think they are real.
 
wolftrax said:
You did have some sort of sighting that you believed at the time was of a sasquatch, right? So then you would be called a "Former-Woo"? "Post-Woo?" "Recovering Woo-aholic"? "I could be called a Woo yesterday, but I cannot be called Woo today"? "Woo's on first?"
Click to expand...
What-woo talkin' 'bout Willis?

No, for a time I was eating the Woo Cornbread. Then I started researching hallucinations as an explanation. And experienced a couple more instances while hunting, where I saw a branch and my mind turned it into a deer antler, or a burned out stump, and my brain told me, in those predawn minutes, that that was a Black bear standing up looking at me. And I realized two things.
A. That people's sensory interpretation is powerful enough to fool their conscious minds.
B. That a large percentage of normal people have hallucinations, or have instances like Tube's (with the plastic bag) or mine (with the tree stump)where the mind incorporates subconscious inputs into their conscious sensory interpretation, resulting in misinterpretations of sensory cues.
 
Drewbot said:
What-woo talkin' 'bout Willis?

No, for a time I was eating the Woo Cornbread. Then I started researching hallucinations as an explanation. And experienced a couple more instances while hunting, where I saw a branch and my mind turned it into a deer antler, or a burned out stump, and my brain told me, in those predawn minutes, that that was a Black bear standing up looking at me. And I realized two things.
A. That people's sensory interpretation is powerful enough to fool their conscious minds.
B. That a large percentage of normal people have hallucinations, or have instances like Tube's (with the plastic bag) or mine (with the tree stump)where the mind incorporates subconscious inputs into their conscious sensory interpretation, resulting in misinterpretations of sensory cues.
Click to expand...

The want to see factor can be thrown at blobsquatchs, many tracks and stick structures also, I for one think they in paticular get way too much attention. Just too easily caused by wind damage and the like.
 
Drewbot said:
What-woo talkin' 'bout Willis?

No, for a time I was eating the Woo Cornbread. Then I started researching hallucinations as an explanation. And experienced a couple more instances while hunting, where I saw a branch and my mind turned it into a deer antler, or a burned out stump, and my brain told me, in those predawn minutes, that that was a Black bear standing up looking at me. And I realized two things.
A. That people's sensory interpretation is powerful enough to fool their conscious minds.
B. That a large percentage of normal people have hallucinations, or have instances like Tube's (with the plastic bag) or mine (with the tree stump)where the mind incorporates subconscious inputs into their conscious sensory interpretation, resulting in misinterpretations of sensory cues.
Click to expand...

I think a lot of people take issue with the word, 'hallucination' because they equate it to serious mental problems. For example I wouldn't think of mistaking a tree stump for a bear as being a hallucination. It may be the correct use of the word but if we could find another word to describe the same thing it may help.
 
Kathie Lee and Hoda from the NBC Today Show went out looking for Bigfoot with Don Keating in Ohio. They didn't find one but it sure is fun to watch. They learn the lingo quick from Keating. Footer. Footin'. Foot. Wood on wood. A yell. Stick stack.
 

Attachments

  • todayshow.jpg
    todayshow.jpg
    43.1 KB · Views: 3
That so funny. Two goofy women being...two goofy women. They sure had a hard time with the "...25 years?" thing! And gotta dig that name Hoda Kotb. That poor Don Keating. The Daily Show™ coulda had him beggin' for mercy. Salt Fork aka 'Bigfoot Flats' State Park handicapped parking area again huh? I wonder if Keating's 'Bigfoot Is Partial To Handicapped Parking Lots' group could get into any kind of legal trouble for regularly beating-a-dead-horse in a no-beating-a-dead-horse zone?
 
GT/CS said:
For example I wouldn't think of mistaking a tree stump for a bear as being a hallucination. It may be the correct use of the word but if we could find another word to describe the same thing it may help.
Click to expand...

I've seen the word 'pareidolia' used frequently here.
 
William Parcher said:
Kathie Lee and Hoda from the NBC Today Show went out looking for Bigfoot with Don Keating in Ohio. They didn't find one but it sure is fun to watch. They learn the lingo quick from Keating. Footer. Footin'. Foot. Wood on wood. A yell. Stick stack.
Click to expand...

Oh, that is delicious. Keating and Kathy Lee. Wood on wood and a stick stack attack. We're footin', baby. Did Keating share the gold?

picture.php


Bigfoot came down like Deep Impact.

Did Keating show Kathy Lee and Hoda how to put some ketchup on it?

picture.php
 
William Parcher said:
Kathie Lee and Hoda from the NBC Today Show went out looking for Bigfoot with Don Keating in Ohio. They didn't find one but it sure is fun to watch. They learn the lingo quick from Keating. Footer. Footin'. Foot. Wood on wood. A yell. Stick stack.
Click to expand...

I like at the end of the program "but twenty five years... mmm" As she sticks her finger in her mouth (kinda sexy?) haha. Kinda feel bad for the guy, then you have to just laugh.

lold.jpg
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom