• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Simple Challenge For Bigfoot Supporters

Status
Not open for further replies.
Please forgive the following minor pseudo-meltdown:

Bigfoot is on Admiralty Island, bigfoot is on Rhode Island. Bigfoot is in Iowa, bigfoot is in New Jersey.

Why the #$%& can anyone think that this is anything other than human behaviour?!

Sorry, but it's a little boggling sometimes.
 
Mad Hom said:
....Do people who value their life ever pursue injured brown bears though?
Click to expand...

With great apprehension.

My guess is yes....but they don't pursue 8 foot apes...go figure.
Click to expand...

Bears are known dangers.

Bipedal apes?

Great minds like that of Mad Horn insist they don't exist. Even the Fish and Game Dept. don't list them in their regs.

Shooting one is a freebie. There's no need to risk life or limb tracking a wounded one, because "they don't exist", right?
 
Huntster said:
I knew you never read Glickman, and I knew that any and all evidence wouldn't change your "mind".



And your "theorys" can't match Glickman's.



No. I'm not saying that.



No.



So where is this place of your wild imagination?



Glickman addressed that, too.

But you wouldn't know about that, would you? Despite your strong "opinions".

Imagine that!



I don't know. I"m not much on Florida, skunk apes, Seminoles, Miami, etc.

Been there.

Didn't like it.
Click to expand...

Of course because Glickman is your chosen exalted Pope of higher Bigfeetsus learning isn't he Fudd? Whatever the man says you take as gospel...fine whatever Fudd.

Hairy Man already deflated my theory with his list of Eastern Indian Bigfeetsus legends...I did use the words IF and MAYBE while positing about Eastern Bigfeetsus Lore...so I'm ok standing corrected here.

Also what the hell does whether you liked Florida or not have to do with the price of tea in China?!?!? I know you feel Alaska is the greatest great place that was ever great Fudley but please explain the relavence it has on this discussion??
 
kitakaze said:
I'm glad you brought up the BFRO as I specifically had them in mind when I asked the question. I'm finding it hard to think why such a group wouldn't be able to guarantee an 'experience' if we are to accept at face value much of what we are encouraged to believe concerning sasquatches. They have the best report database, plenty of willing help from all over NA, and before the exodus plenty of very professional minds to assist and guide their efforts in locating areas of sasquatch activity. A quick glance at their website shows seven upcoming expeditions, five of which are sold out. These areas certainly weren't selected at random. If you can identify areas of high enough sasquatch activity to invite members of the public to pay to come along and lend any gear they might have then you'd think that you've narrowed down their whereabouts a bit.

In general I'm having trouble understanding why any devoted and resourceful group wouldn't be able to locate and identify sasquatches if they put their minds to it. A 7-10 ft giant bipedal hominid inhabiting high density pockets from Alaska to the Florida panhandle in numbers sufficient to sustain a healthy breeding population and often reported should have been identified at some point in the last 200 years. 84 species of mammal in NA and you think in the process of cataloguing that list one of the biggest that seems to be reported from wherever there seems to be sufficient cover would be found. As I've said elsewhere I'm also at a loss to understand why any previous or ongoing studies being conducted in BF habitat has failed to identify these creatures. Indeed it seems that as Skookum Meadow is by no means little known amongst those with an interest in sasquatch you'd think we'd have seen something of substance in terms of reliable evidence by now.

OK, next question:

Why, in your opinion, has none of these areas of high activity yielded anything in the way of reliable evidence?

Please let me know if you have a question in return. Thanks.
Click to expand...

I apologize in advance that I am not in the greatest mood this morning. The ceiling in our newly remodeled bathroom sprung a major leak overnight and it an't pretty...

A) The BFRO is never going to find anything during their expeditions because that isn't why they are there. They neither educate nor attempt to give participants any instructions on even carrying a camera with them (cause that interferes with them opening their minds and "feeling" if bigfoot is there.

B) I can only address the PNW because that is where my knowledge/experience is (and we've already discussed my thoughts about the rest of the US). Based on the millions of acres within the PNW (BLM, FS, PS, Tribal, etc.), it's extraordinarily hard to find 2,000 of anything in that vast of a space (assuming 2,000 is a reasonable population size). I realize that it's a catch 22 that you can't have it both ways; clearly if sighting reports are to be believed they are seen and therefore some amount of evidence could be collected. I think there are multiple issues - 1) there are plenty of idiots out there claiming to be looking for evidence who wouldn't recognize anything of value if it hit them in the face; 2) those that do have some skills are limited by time, money, and location. Of course I have already stated that there has been intriguing data retrieved, but clearly, without doubt, more is needed. I believe if some very serious long term research were funded, it would answer the question (for most) one way or another.
 
Hairy Man said:
I'm assuming when you say east of the Mississippi that you are including the headwaters as well, so here is a list for your use. The list is not all there is, just what picked out quickly from a list of several hundred:...
Click to expand...
Hairy Man, why stop there? Why not an expansive global list of various cultures words for something amounting to big monster men? Is it because if you confine it to NA native cultures it makes bigfoot more believable and if you expand it it does the opposite?
 
Huntster said:
With great apprehension.



Bears are known dangers.

Bipedal apes?

Great minds like that of Mad Horn insist they don't exist. Even the Fish and Game Dept. don't list them in their regs.

Shooting one is a freebie. There's no need to risk life or limb tracking a wounded one, because "they don't exist", right?
Click to expand...

Ok but they still follow them right Fudd? That was the question.

People follow all kinds of large dangerous injured critters all the time. Bigfoot Fan tries to sell us on this....No man would ever follow an injured Bigfeetsus if they valued their life take as if Bigfeetsus is superhumanly scary or soemthing.

To me it's yet another convenient excuse as to why Bigfoot Nation doesn't have a body yet.
 
kitakaze said:
....What do you think of the fact that the Admiralty Island (Tlinglit- Kootznoowoo 'Fortress of the Bear') which has the highest density of brown bears in NA (estimated 1600 bears on the million-acre island), 955,000 acres of federally protected old growth temperate rainforest, and roughly 650 people (mostly in Angoon) also has sasquatch reports?
Click to expand...

I think that's significant, especially since Kodiak does not.

I also point out that the reports on Admiralty are few when compared to POW and Revellagigedo.

So:

Revellagigedo/POW = scores of reports
Admiralty = a few reports
Kodiak = no reports

Now, what does that tell you?

Anyway, I don't care if you are an 8ft Gigantofrickinpithecus, would you wanna mess with this bad boy?

Bad to the bone, they are. Nasty critters.
 
Mad Hom said:
Hairy Man already deflated my theory with his list of Eastern Indian Bigfeetsus legends...I did use the words IF and MAYBE while positing about Eastern Bigfeetsus Lore...so I'm ok standing corrected here.
Click to expand...

Dude, Hairy Man is a chick!

I can provide the same sort of list for every area of the U.S. However, please note, that just because there is a traditional name for a bigfoot-like creature doesn't mean I believe bigfoot lives there now (or ever did). There are many reasons for stories.
 
kitakaze said:
Hairy Man, you're kidding, right? I'm not responsible for how the author of that part of the wikipedia article on the Tlinglit chose their spelling but are you suggesting that they are refering to something other than this?:
Click to expand...

Kooshdakhaa and Kushtaka are two separate creatures (or people). They sound similar because both have the word "otter" in them. But in Tlingit, they are separate stories with separate stories. What were discussing yesterday was Kushtaka.
 
Hairy Man said:
Dude, Hairy Man is a chick!

I can provide the same sort of list for every area of the U.S. However, please note, that just because there is a traditional name for a bigfoot-like creature doesn't mean I believe bigfoot lives there now (or ever did). There are many reasons for stories.
Click to expand...

That includes the PNW as well correct?

Oh and sorry about assuming a person with the moniker Hairy Man was a guy.
 
Hairy Man said:
I apologize in advance that I am not in the greatest mood this morning. The ceiling in our newly remodeled bathroom sprung a major leak overnight and it an't pretty...
Click to expand...
I used to live in a house on Vancouver Island that would have the most lovely sewage backup floods in the basement every three months or so due to tree roots so I can sympathize.
Hairy Man said:
A) The BFRO is never going to find anything during their expeditions because that isn't why they are there. They neither educate nor attempt to give participants any instructions on even carrying a camera with them (cause that interferes with them opening their minds and "feeling" if bigfoot is there.
Click to expand...
It's unclear if you're saying the BFRO isn't there to find anything or the expeditions aren't. IMO that doesn't address why they don't find anything. They were and still claim to be a serious organization devoted to solving the 'mystery'. Even if you excuse the expeditions it doesn't account for the inability of the organization to obtain reliable evidence. No such creatures being there does.
Hairy Man said:
B) I can only address the PNW because that is where my knowledge/experience is (and we've already discussed my thoughts about the rest of the US). Based on the millions of acres within the PNW (BLM, FS, PS, Tribal, etc.), it's extraordinarily hard to find 2,000 of anything in that vast of a space (assuming 2,000 is a reasonable population size). I realize that it's a catch 22 that you can't have it both ways; clearly if sighting reports are to be believed they are seen and therefore some amount of evidence could be collected. I think there are multiple issues - 1) there are plenty of idiots out there claiming to be looking for evidence who wouldn't recognize anything of value if it hit them in the face; 2) those that do have some skills are limited by time, money, and location. Of course I have already stated that there has been intriguing data retrieved, but clearly, without doubt, more is needed. I believe if some very serious long term research were funded, it would answer the question (for most) one way or another.
Click to expand...
Respectfully, Hairy Man, if you can only address the PNW in terms of sasquatch than I don't understand how you can be so certain that real creatures or the most likely explanation. As I said, you can't have the bigfoot phenomenom and speak only of the PNW.

Next question for the Q&A:

What do you think is the most likely cause for the completely widespread nature of the bigfoot phenomenom?
 
kitakaze said:
Hairy Man, why stop there? Why not an expansive global list of various cultures words for something amounting to big monster men? Is it because if you confine it to NA native cultures it makes bigfoot more believable and if you expand it it does the opposite?
Click to expand...

I'm not particularly sure why the fact that NA's have bigfoots in their traditional stories is giving everyone such heartburn. They also have bigfoots in basket designs, songs, and rock art (most famously the Hairy Man pictographs in California). As an anthropologist, I find it very intriguing because there are only two choices: either these animals are real, hence why the stories are so widespread OR its completely mythical and then why are the stories so widespread? At no point have I ever stated that these stories are evidence that bigfoot is real; but they are intriguing and worthy of study.
 
kitakaze said:
Please forgive the following minor pseudo-meltdown:

Bigfoot is on Admiralty Island, bigfoot is on Rhode Island. Bigfoot is in Iowa, bigfoot is in New Jersey.

Why the #$%& can anyone think that this is anything other than human behaviour?!

Sorry, but it's a little boggling sometimes.
Click to expand...

New Jersey has the Pine Barrens, Rhode Island the Great Swamp......even Iowa has wilderness.

"There are beautiful forests with evergreens and oaks so tall and old, giving way to a grassy plain with a river meandering slowly through it. In the morning the sun rises in many colors and a slight fog covers the land. In another part there are caves with beautiful limestone formations that range in color from pure white to a deep red. They are nestled into a lush, green forest with all kinds of flourishing plants and animals. There is a stream peacefully running through the hills. It cascades into a gigantic cavern with the biggest formations of all. The stream flows deep into the cave, eventually disappearing into the ground. These may seem like a fantasy, but they are very real. Places like these are scattered across Iowa. Places like Chichaqua, Makoqueta Caves, Eagle Cave and Yellow Banks. There are many more."

http://www.uiowa.edu/~ipops/wildiowaessayprojectdigman.htm

Admiralty Island has a national monument in a national forest:

http://www.fs.fed.us/r10/tongass/districts/admiralty/

Brown Bears, too.
 
Mad Hom said:
That includes the PNW as well correct?

Oh and sorry about assuming a person with the moniker Hairy Man was a guy.
Click to expand...

Of course.

That's what you get for assuming anything...just like I don't assume that you really look like Rob Zombie or are truly mad.
 
Hairy Man said:
I'm not particularly sure why the fact that NA's have bigfoots in their traditional stories is giving everyone such heartburn. They also have bigfoots in basket designs, songs, and rock art (most famously the Hairy Man pictographs in California). As an anthropologist, I find it very intriguing because there are only two choices: either these animals are real, hence why the stories are so widespread OR its completely mythical and then why are the stories so widespread? At no point have I ever stated that these stories are evidence that bigfoot is real; but they are intriguing and worthy of study.
Click to expand...

No heartburn here...it's just that Fudster seems to be trying to say that because Native Americans on Kodiak Island don't have any stories about wild hairy men in their lore and subsequently no Bigfeetsus sightings yet PWI does and does that that is somehow signifigant.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom