Latest Bigfoot "evidence"

[ChrisBFRPKY]

This is really an anti-intellectual sentiment. Critical thinking is just plain worthless.

I'm of the opinion that an argument over a story won't make it go away.
Chris B.

 

[Correa Neto]

Attention-seeking, attention-whoring...
This seems to be one of things behind some footers.
MY sightings, MY evidence, MY skills, MY gear...
See me!
Hear me!
Discuss me!
Talk about me!

 

[Gilbert Syndrome]

First, when asked why none has been shot my reply was "I don't know" I've not made any "excuse" I've only speculated. I did respond that one was reported shot by Daniel Boone well over 200 years ago. (A creature perfectly matching the description of Bigfoot) Of course that was quickly dismissed as a "story", "campfire tale" etc. It may be? But the report is there. Some even believe this Daniel Boone account to be the birth of Bigfoot in the US.

I think what I did was ask a question. Could all of the reports be lies? I have no idea if UK has a Bigfoot or not. The US state of Hawaii seems to be relatively Bigfoot free, so if they're not into remote islands, who knows? I don't know.


Some of the US footers may be onto something. I can't say I know or share info with any of the UK guys, so I don't know what they're finding or not.
Chris B.

I find it incredibly hard to believe that you don't have an opinion either way, I mean, are you just hesitant to give an opinion because it may then impact on your belief of the "NA Sasquatch?"

Surely, not all of the reports of the British Bigfoot be lies or mistakes, can they? Yep, they can, and they are. Even the stories about the Big Grey Man of Ben Macdui have recently been twisted into some sort of Scottish Bigfoot legend, when it's always been regarded by locals as a soley paranormal being, and of course, a mere legend brought on by the strange atmosphere and climate of the mountain.

My point is, it's very possible, and likely probable, that something such as Bigfoot can be nothing more than a bunch of legends and lies, merged as one big pile of myth.

 

[Gilbert Syndrome]

Well it is true that none of the above turned over a body for identification. There is quite a bit of difference when comparing Daniel Boone to Rick Dyer. One was a major historic figure whose praises are many, the other lied to get his 15 minutes of fame but in time will be completely forgotten.


I think the best comparison of a Yahoo in that case would be a Gorilla. It's the "hairy man-like giant" part that matches Bigfoot descriptions exactly.


Certainly.

Faragher, J. M. 1992. Daniel Boone: The Life and Legend of an American Pioneer. New York:
Henry Holt & Company


Trotti, H. H. 1994. Did fiction give birth to Bigfoot? SKEPTICAL INQUIRER 18(5): 541-2

If you wish to study the comparisons Boone used taken from Swift's Gulliver's Travels, Teddy Roosevelt also discusses some of these in his book:
Daniel Boone’s Move to Kentucky (1897) Theodore Roosevelt
(Should be available at Amazon)

But if you're interested in Bigfoot stories from prominent Americans, I'd also recommend another one of Roosevelt's books called "The Wilderness Hunter" which should be available at Amazon as well. Even if you don't care for Bigfoot, it's a very interesting read. Teddy R. was a heck of a man even back in his day.



So, what would be an unbiased speculation for a creature described to be a "Hairy man-like giant" ?



I appreciate the sentiment and let me say it was a pleasure to read your post. You Sir are a writer. I don't know if you write at the present but if you don't please start as soon as possible. I'll buy your books.

As far as my encounters with these creatures, I have no doubt what I've seen. They perfectly match the description of Bigfoot. The bulk of my encounters happened in 2010 (some creatures were seen by multiple witnesses during some of these encounters so rest easy on the hallucination/mistaken identity theories thrown in the mix by a few here) and I continue to be out in the woods since. I will continue to go trekking during peak sighting seasons as long as I am physically able.

I have enjoyed the outdoors since the age of 8 and will continue to do so for as long as I'm able. During all that time outdoors, hunting, fishing, camping, exploring etc, I never saw a Bigfoot while in the woods until 2010. I'm 48, so that's 35 years without a sighting. Of course I wasn't looking for one either. But based on my own past, I'm not surprised you have yet to see one. If they were easy to locate, they'd be on the books by now.






Reality is, the story is real. Like it or not.


I agree, as long as there is a good water and food source they would be more likely to end up in these areas. However, some reports have them in odd places too. A quick check usually reveals a river or stream nearby or within the sighting area. Personally I think this would suggest a nomadic behavior at times but that's only speculation.


I think there are sighting reports throughout history. But, no specimens taken.

Yes he was and reportedly Gulliver's Travels was the first book to enter KY.

Well, my logic kinda considers ongoing reports of the same thing here. The reports of Bigfoot in KY continue.

I don't think witches ever really existed. I'm sure there were and are people who think they're witches though. Some may practice it but none are. Kinda like the folks who want to be vampires....

I'm not really concerned with dragons, trolls ,fairies, etc because none of those are being reported here. And even if they were, I'm skeptical.



That may be but only according to John Mack Faragher the author's account . The Yeohoh version came from Mr. Lee Maggard of Harlan County, Kentucky Western Folklore (Roberts 1957) and a matching account/pronunciation from Nancy McDaniel of Big Leatherfoot Creek, Perry County, KY which can be found as told to folktale collector Leonard Roberts, who published it under the title “The Origin of Man” in South From Hell-fer-Sartin (1955)

I enjoy researching old KY Folk tales and legends. I also think Swift derived his term from Aboriginal folklore as well. Which is really cool as that means it predated Capt Cook's visit of 1770. Written in 1726, Gulliver's Travels predated Cook by quite a bit. Chris B.



Very omniscient view. How does a new discovery such as this fit into that view?

http://www.cnn.com/2015/01/29/asia/taiwan-penghu-human-jawbone-fossil/index.html





Back for more? Can you explain what "BLAARGing" is? It seems to be a favorite term you use but please remember, I'm just a Hillbilly with a limited vocabulary. All help appreciated.
Thanks, Chris B.



Perhaps you missed it again, so here is the direct quote from the article again.
"Bahaa-el-din has been studying the species for four years but said it was so secretive and remarkable in its ability to stay hidden that she had only ever sighted one cat."

http://www.businessinsider.com/the-worlds-most-elusive-cat-has-been-captured-on-camera-2015-1

Please feel free to check it out. Again. It's still there. Chris B.

Except that Teddy Roosevelt never told a Bigfoot story, it was implied that he had, but he never mentioned such a thing.

 

[LTC8K6]

Except that Teddy Roosevelt never told a Bigfoot story, it was implied that he had, but he never mentioned such a thing.

That doesn't matter. If you can jam bigfoot in anywhere, you jam bigfoot in anywhere.

You just keep telling yourself that Roosevelt or Boone could have meant bigfoot, and stick to your story. Keep telling the story with that bias, wherever you go.

Eventually people will leave you alone with your beliefs and your cadre of believers, which is where you started.

 

[Gilbert Syndrome]

I didn't say that at all. What I said was the story is there, but the details of the account have changed. Big difference.

If you'll notice History was passed orally in those times then usually recorded by a third person. This is why research of different sources is very important. Even Daniel Boone considered some of the stuff written about him to be "hogwash" back then.

It doesn't really matter about anyone's opinion of the story. It certainly could be a tall tale or not. The point is and always was, the story exists no matter how you take it. Chris B.

So, the story isn't there, not really, it's all just speculation and heresy based on something that may have been written, but can't be found at this moment in time?

Also, you say you haven't been "researching" Sasquatch since 1980, but rather since 2007. So what were you doing all those years on that migration path? Surely you collected something worth offering up as evidence?

If you never started researching them 'til 2007, never had a sighting til 2010, then how do you even know your family had their property on a Bigfoot "hot-spot" like you suggest? 27 years and you have nothing to show for it? 27 years on a Bigfoot migration path where you claim to have spotted prints, but you have nothing to show for it?

Not to mention, you said you'd been interested in Bigfoot for all those years and yet it took you nearly 40 something years to see one, but you claim that you only started researching them in 2007, so in just 3 years of research, you spotted a Bigfoot, but after 27 years of living on a migration path, you saw nothing?

 

[Gilbert Syndrome]

That doesn't matter. If you can jam bigfoot in anywhere, you jam bigfoot in anywhere.

You just keep telling yourself that Roosevelt or Boone could have meant bigfoot, and stick to your story. Keep telling the story with that bias, wherever you go.

Eventually people will leave you alone with your beliefs and your cadre of believers, which is where you started.

Exactly, and now we have the Bigfoot Revisionists of the modern-age. Anyone can now go back through history and just begin calling "Bigfoot" on every story that seems a little squatchy.

Suddenly we have Yeti's in the Scottish cairngorms, suddenly Teddy Roosevelt has had a Bigfoot encounter, and on and on.

Now, in the UK, groups like the British Crypto Society, or whatever they're called, are attributing Bigfoot to any half-arsed paranormal tale imaginable.

 

[barehl]

Well that's a brief snippet of what I allow in the public domain.

Children's tactic #1: I have a secret.

Anything further is need to know basis.

Children's tactic #2: If you won't be my friend then I won't tell you.

However, I do not say there I have been doing research since 1980. It says my interest was peaked about Bigfoot in 1980. The actual research started in 2007 when I founded the Bigfoot Research Project of Kentucky, later in 2010, I had my first sighting.

There is evidence dating back to that time (since 1980) though I was not actively recording it or researching Bigfoot.

Children's tactic #3: And then I got a pet dinosaur for my birthday but no one else could see it because it was invisible.

If you consider that to be dishonest, you're obviously off on some sort of fruitless agenda, though if it makes you feel good to think I'm a liar by all means feel free. I'll try not to lose sleep over it.

Children's tactic #4: I'm rubber; you're glue.

My sightings are mostly kept private. So what? Who cares? I have released a little info on a few.

Children's tactic #5: You weren't there so you don't know that I didn't ride in a spaceship.

I'm not interested in sharing anything until my work is complete.

Children's tactic #6: I'm building a giant castle behind my house but I can't show it to you until I get it finished.

 

[RayG]

You just keep telling yourself that Roosevelt or Boone could have meant bigfoot, and stick to your story. Keep telling the story with that bias, wherever you go.

Toss David Thompson on the pile too, 'cause his journal entry sounds Squatchy.

RayG

 

[HarryHenderson]

<brevity snip>

Back for more? Can you explain what "BLAARGing" is? It seems to be a favorite term you use but please remember, I'm just a Hillbilly with a limited vocabulary. All help appreciated.
Thanks, Chris B...

All help appreciated? Just a hillbilly? You couldn't be more disingenuous if they paid you in Bitcoin. I don't recall anyone except you calling you a hillbilly. And is "Back for more?" your pathetic attempt at re-writing history? Lest you forget your post got eviscerated last time. Somebody's back for more and Bingo was his name-o.

<cue story degenerating even further>

As part of the tactics in your ongoing standing up to the JREF mission (a BLAARGing role no doubt), whenever one of your arguments is leaking, more than once you've tried turning what's left into a semantic tirade. Not always, but regularly. Enough that you've even made posts arguing "facts" are really just "opinions".

Yet now...

You pretend to not know what BLAARGing means?! Which I'd argue is not so flattering given you directly addressed that very thing a month ago. Yes you've carefully avoided direct comment on it for the most part, but you forgot to let that one go. So indeed your now not knowing could only be the result of a Festivus MIRACLE! Or it's selective attention. An effective distraction technique used extensively in deliberate deception. Dandy Don Meldrum has sustained an extended (and lucrative) Bigfoot career by virtue of its specific and constant use.

No, you know exactly what BLAARGing means! I'm guessing you pretend otherwise simply because it's so damning to your case. Being that it explains literally everything one needs to know about Bigfoot and who plays it. And that's just in the acronym, forget the rest of the model.

 

[ChrisBFRPKY]

I find it incredibly hard to believe that you don't have an opinion either way, I mean, are you just hesitant to give an opinion because it may then impact on your belief of the "NA Sasquatch?"

Surely, not all of the reports of the British Bigfoot be lies or mistakes, can they? Yep, they can, and they are. Even the stories about the Big Grey Man of Ben Macdui have recently been twisted into some sort of Scottish Bigfoot legend, when it's always been regarded by locals as a soley paranormal being, and of course, a mere legend brought on by the strange atmosphere and climate of the mountain.

My point is, it's very possible, and likely probable, that something such as Bigfoot can be nothing more than a bunch of legends and lies, merged as one big pile of myth.

I haven't personally investigated any alleged Bigfoot sightings in the UK, so I'll stick with "I don't know". If you have, and you've determined there's nothing to it. That's great. I can neither dispute nor confirm your findings. I'm not ashamed to admit "I don't know" when I don't have the info required for a finding.
Chris B.

 

[ChrisBFRPKY]

Except that Teddy Roosevelt never told a Bigfoot story, it was implied that he had, but he never mentioned such a thing.

That's correct, Roosevelt never said "Bigfoot" likely because the term wasn't coined at the time of his writings. I suppose the implication that the creature he described in the story was a Bigfoot was due to the descriptions given in the account. Chris B.

 

[ChrisBFRPKY]

So, the story isn't there, not really, it's all just speculation and heresy based on something that may have been written, but can't be found at this moment in time?

Also, you say you haven't been "researching" Sasquatch since 1980, but rather since 2007. So what were you doing all those years on that migration path? Surely you collected something worth offering up as evidence?

If you never started researching them 'til 2007, never had a sighting til 2010, then how do you even know your family had their property on a Bigfoot "hot-spot" like you suggest? 27 years and you have nothing to show for it? 27 years on a Bigfoot migration path where you claim to have spotted prints, but you have nothing to show for it?

Not to mention, you said you'd been interested in Bigfoot for all those years and yet it took you nearly 40 something years to see one, but you claim that you only started researching them in 2007, so in just 3 years of research, you spotted a Bigfoot, but after 27 years of living on a migration path, you saw nothing?

The story is there. Several sources agree Boone told his nephew about shooting a 10 foot tall "Yahoo". The specific details of the account have changed over time though. And that is not at all uncommon.

I haven't lived at the farm my parents purchased my entire life. I did find evidence that was odd though. Reports of sightings by neighbors, unknown screams, and the most interesting find there would be the trackways. The last oddity sparked my interest enough to begin research in 2007 after an odd encounter with something that left large tracks in the snow. But no close up visual sighting confirmation until 2010. Until 2010, I was skeptical of the existence of such a creature. Now I'm not.

Children's tactic #1: I have a secret.


Children's tactic #2: If you won't be my friend then I won't tell you.


Children's tactic #3: And then I got a pet dinosaur for my birthday but no one else could see it because it was invisible.


Children's tactic #4: I'm rubber; you're glue.


Children's tactic #5: You weren't there so you don't know that I didn't ride in a spaceship.


Children's tactic #6: I'm building a giant castle behind my house but I can't show it to you until I get it finished.

So no Bio info page then?

All help appreciated? Just a hillbilly? You couldn't be more disingenuous if they paid you in Bitcoin. I don't recall anyone except you calling you a hillbilly. And is "Back for more?" your pathetic attempt at re-writing history? Lest you forget your post got eviscerated last time. Somebody's back for more and Bingo was his name-o.

<cue story degenerating even further>

As part of the tactics in your ongoing standing up to the JREF mission (a BLAARGing role no doubt), whenever one of your arguments is leaking, more than once you've tried turning what's left into a semantic tirade. Not always, but regularly. Enough that you've even made posts arguing "facts" are really just "opinions".

Yet now...

You pretend to not know what BLAARGing means?! Which I'd argue is not so flattering given you directly addressed that very thing a month ago. Yes you've carefully avoided direct comment on it for the most part, but you forgot to let that one go. So indeed your now not knowing could only be the result of a Festivus MIRACLE! Or it's selective attention. An effective distraction technique used extensively in deliberate deception. Dandy Don Meldrum has sustained an extended (and lucrative) Bigfoot career by virtue of its specific and constant use.

No, you know exactly what BLAARGing means! I'm guessing you pretend otherwise simply because it's so damning to your case. Being that it explains literally everything one needs to know about Bigfoot and who plays it. And that's just in the acronym, forget the rest of the model.

Undoubtedly, in your mind you are always the victor in every debate. I see things as they are however.

I simply asked you for the definition of "BLAARGING" since you seem to throw it around so much. If you'll remember, I was kind enough to not only provide you with the definitions of a few terms in question previously, but I also provided you with the sources of the folks who coined them.
Can't you be so kind? Chris B.

 

[ChrisBFRPKY]

Toss David Thompson on the pile too, 'cause his journal entry sounds Squatchy.

RayG

Ray, if they're being honest and they've done their background work, I think most would speculate he's describing a 4 toed bear track. The claw marks are a pretty good giveaway. A bear missing a toe is not uncommon. I've seen it twice once in TN and once in NM. Chris B.

 

[Jodie]

Attention-seeking, attention-whoring...
This seems to be one of things behind some footers.
MY sightings, MY evidence, MY skills, MY gear...
See me!
Hear me!
Discuss me!
Talk about me!

Ditto on that, couldn't agree more.

 

[Gilbert Syndrome]

I haven't personally investigated any alleged Bigfoot sightings in the UK, so I'll stick with "I don't know". If you have, and you've determined there's nothing to it. That's great. I can neither dispute nor confirm your findings. I'm not ashamed to admit "I don't know" when I don't have the info required for a finding.
Chris B.

Great way at avoiding the question I asked you, that's twice you've done it now. You won't offer your opinion because if you say that you agree that a small island such as the UK couldn't possibly contain Bigfoot, and thus all of the stories are either lies or mistakes then that opens the USA Bigfoot sightings up to the same scrutiny.

My point is that it's not only very possible for everyone to be fabricating or mistaking their stories, it's very probable. In the case of the UK, no research needs to be undertaken. I'm 100% sure that we don't have Sasquatch roaming the moors tossing Cadburys Cream Eggs at weary hikers.

 

[Resume]

I'm not ashamed to admit "I don't know" when I don't have the info required for a finding.

Don't try that; we've seen what you consider a "finding."

I see things as they are however.

You clearly can't discern a shadow from 9-ft monkey. Perhaps a trip to Four Eyes?

I simply asked you for the definition of "BLAARGING" since you seem to throw it around so much.

Bigfoot Live Action Alternative Reality Gaming. You know, what you're doing here.

 

[LTC8K6]

It's just hard for me to trust someone who can repeatedly get close to a giant monkey, while carrying a big gun and a high definition video camera, and yet still can't show me the giant monkey or any evidence of the giant monkey.

Yet they expect me to accept the giant monkey as real.

 

[barehl]

So no Bio info page then

No, I don't have an actual bio page. However, I can give you some general background.

I was born in Indiana. Both Terre Haute and Indianapolis compete for the title, "Crossroads of the Nation". What most people aren't aware of is that this term predates colonization and comes from the fact that several major bigfoot migration routes cross in the area. Several towns along the Wabash River have French names such as Vincennes, Terre Haute, and Lafayette since these were settled by French traders. When they got lonely out in the woods, they would knock trees to attract bigfoot for sexual exchanges. Unfortunately, the female bigfoot in the region had exceptional eagerness and endurance for mating. This led to the death of many French trappers and is probably the biggest reason why Indiana was not colonized by the French. This also was the origin of the cautionary saying, "Don't knock it until you've tried it." French traders did make money by selling hair brushes to bigfoot in exchange for mastodon. However, over-hunting led to the extinction of mastodon in Indiana and the remaining stocks were sold as bath brushes. As the region was colonized by non-French, the amorous bigfoot females became more of a problem. They were eventually captured, put on ships, and taken to Australia where they have had a similar devastating effect on the native Yowie population.

When I was younger it was very hard to get much of a Christmas tree because most of the good ones were eaten by bigfoot. Most years, we were lucky to have a branch to put the presents under. For the same reason, people preferred Cyprus mulch since pine bark mulch would be mostly gone in a few days. I did hunt for squirrels when I was younger. You really couldn't hunt for deer or turkeys because so many of these were killed and eaten by bigfoot. In fact, Turkey Run State Park gets its name from the fact that it was so common to see bigfoot chasing turkeys in the area. This led to several bills in the State legislature to declare bigfoot a nuisance but it was opposed by biologists because of critical the migration routes. Indiana began relocating bigfoot outside the state to places like Kentucky. However, bigfoot kept returning until it was realized that they were attracted by the scent of Pine-Sol which was popular cleaning product. This led to Pine-Sol being prohibited in areas along the border. Even so, in the spring and fall, large numbers of bigfoot would still enter the state on their way to other regions. Eventually, Indiana settled for a busing program to transport bigfoot across the state. Since then, deer and turkey populations have recovered but busing remains controversial.

 

[Donn]

..
I was born in Indiana. Both Terre Haute and Indianapolis compete for the title, "Crossroads of the Nation"..

That was amazing.