[Merged] Finding Bigfoot - Page 10

xblade · 23rd June 2011, 11:20 PM

Originally Posted by parnassus

I agree but what can you do? Hopefully peer review will expose the nonsense but it will undoubtedly be published somewhere. Science is just not very good at dealing with hoaxers.

The believers are typically climate change denialists, conspiracy theorists, paranormalists etc without a college degree. They have no idea about probability, statistics, anatomy, zoology or genetics. The exploiters are making money feeding them what they want to hear.

Not sure why you'd throw climate change denialists in there, considering that's just about the biggest scam going. Even worse, the climate change scam screws all of us, whereas bigfoot doesn't really hurt anyone but those who choose to waste their own money chasing it.

parnassus · 24th June 2011, 06:12 AM

Lol conspiracy theory.

Howie Felterbush · 24th June 2011, 07:14 AM

Originally Posted by xblade

Not sure why you'd throw climate change denialists in there, considering that's just about the biggest scam going. Even worse, the climate change scam screws all of us, whereas bigfoot doesn't really hurt anyone but those who choose to waste their own money chasing it.

Tell that to the pig.

The Shrike · 24th June 2011, 08:06 AM

Originally Posted by parnassus

a. There are some pretty bad journals in my field and i suspect in other fields as well.
b. It probably hinges on the honesty and credibility of those who submitted the samples.

Well, the bone sample apparently came from these loons, and the "tissue sample" is supposedly from a habituation site in Vermont. What kind of reject from a turnip truck could not see the importance of confirming the provenance of these samples? This seems far sketchier than anything Meldrum used for his ichnotaxon paper.

William Parcher · 24th June 2011, 08:17 AM

The Ketchum/DNA discussion is off topic for this thread. It would be more appropriate in the Bigfoot DNA thread.

William Parcher · 24th June 2011, 09:21 AM

Originally Posted by C_Felix

On a message board, Crytomundo I believe, Matt Moneymaker is claiming that the producers of the show are editing it in a style that makes it sensational and therefore missing the real science they are doing.

Originally Posted by William Parcher

What real science are they doing?

Originally Posted by C_Felix

I really don't know.

But, I'd like to at least give them the benefit of the doubt when it comes to knowing how and where to set up camera traps and what not.

I'm sure if they could land some "real" footage of bigfoot, something that would have people really wondering, I'm sure they monetary payoff would be huge.

That might just be a tad bit of a motivator.

We are talking about BFRO guys who are also on the Finding Bigfoot cast. It is apparent that the producers are allowing these guys to bring previously acquired evidence to the show. These are things like the McKenzie River video, the road crossing video from Georgia, the glass door handprint, mud prints on the street, etc. The BFRO had already approved these things as being good evidence for Bigfoot before they were included in the program.

The BFRO seems to be pulling from their good stuff which has been presented to them from people across the country. We know that the Silver Star Mountain photos are coming up in another episode. The program has not shown the Jacobs Creature trail camera pics, Memorial Day video, New York baby video, Freeman video, Skookum Cast, etc. but these could be used for future episodes. I suspect that the BFRO would name the PGF as being the best evidence for Bigfoot so far to date. Maybe they will somehow work that into a future episode.

So the producers don't seem to be preventing the BFRO guys from showing their good stuff from the past as well as letting them use high-technology during their outings for the program itself. Are you saying that the producers aren't, but should, allow the guys to put up some camera traps so that they can get pictures or video which are way better than anything previously acquired?

Drewbot · 24th June 2011, 09:35 AM

I wonder if they will talk about the piles of Ice and wood chips that they found on one expedition. I think Bartlojays was defending those on BFF.

(The ice/wood chips were thought to be BIGFOOT refrigerators)

http://www.bfro.net/news/roundup/sie...now_mounds.asp

Sierra Snow Mounds

parnassus · 24th June 2011, 10:32 AM

Originally Posted by Drewbot

I wonder if they will talk about the piles of Ice and wood chips that they found on one expedition. I think Bartlojays was defending those on BFF.

(The ice/wood chips were thought to be BIGFOOT refrigerators)

http://www.bfro.net/news/roundup/sie...now_mounds.asp

Sierra Snow Mounds

Wow that snow "mound" stuff is some hilarious "finding bigfoot" type baloney. Isn't this the same Robert Leiterman who hikes around Bluff Creek with BFBM ??

atpeace · 24th June 2011, 02:06 PM

Originally Posted by GT/CS

The part I bolded can never occur because any decent researcher quickly figures out that there is no such animal as bigfoot.
All that's left are the crooks and the wackos.

All that is left are the crooks and wackos? I don't believe that. I am not a wacko or a crook yet I was very curious at one time and so have/are many others who are not crooks or wackos.

And just how quickly would he "figure it out" as a done deal?

My point is how "woo" is handled. Its a free country woo isn't a crime. It is going to exist.

GT/CS · 24th June 2011, 02:34 PM

Do you claim to be a bigfoot researcher or a bigfoot expert? Do you sell your supposed bigfoot expertise?

We're talking about so-called researchers, not everyday people.

Anyone who seriously studies the bigfoot phenomenom quickly learns that there is no solid evidence for bigfoot and therefore the beast does not exist.

The 'researchers' who claim to be experts are in it for the fame and/or the money, or other reasons, one of which is mental instability. So what it comes down to is some are knowingly living a lie and the others are unknowingly living a lie.

parnassus · 24th June 2011, 02:42 PM

bigfootery is a scam, a money-making deception, and a misleading idea for school chuildren. If it were presented like Bambi and Cinderella no one would care. Some threads at JREF are devoted to cold fusion, some to quackery, some to bigfoot, some to religion, etc. Take your pick. It's a free country. Counter-woo should and will be available. Don't like it? Don't read it. Simple.

atpeace · 24th June 2011, 02:50 PM

Originally Posted by GT/CS

Do you claim to be a bigfoot researcher or a bigfoot expert? Do you sell your supposed bigfoot expertise?

We're talking about so-called researchers, not everyday people.

Anyone who seriously studies the bigfoot phenomenom quickly learns that there is no solid evidence for bigfoot and therefore the beast does not exist.

The 'researchers' who claim to be experts are in it for the fame and/or the money, or other reasons, one of which is mental instability. So what it comes down to is some are knowingly living a lie and the others are unknowingly living a lie.

Yes, but at any given time your are going to have woo and those investigating woo. So at any time you may have a sincere researcher. And corrrectly, that researcher would probably not be one for long, but research will still continuously be happening. And can be nothing like the researchers and research on Finging Bigfoot, etc. Again, my point is about how this continuing bf phenomon is handled by researchers.

And yes, I am an expert on bigfoot and would claim such.
There is no one definition of "an expert on bigfoot".

LTC8K6 · 24th June 2011, 04:21 PM

Woo is often a crime, imo. It's also often a terrible ride for those affected by it.

People get scammed out of their money, families are broken up, friendships are ruined, people waste their life savings, grant money is wasted, etc.

People are getting scammed by bigfoot hucksters as we speak.

Whether it's $100K scientific grant money down the toilet, or $50K to buy a fake rubber bigfoot in an ice chest, or $25K for a fake bigfoot movie, or $500 to get close to bigfoot in the woods...it's often money that people or organizations can't afford to waste...

William Parcher · 24th June 2011, 04:35 PM

Barackman reviews the Oregon episode.

All those people who raised their hands at the Beer & Bigfoot tavern gathering and were later featured were folks who had already submitted their encounters to BFRO before the episode filming. Cliff even says that one of the fishing guys (with the red-eyed Bigfoot encounter) was already a friend of his. So those people weren't random strangers met at the tavern. They had already been BFRO approved.

Cliff talks about the recorded "coyote" responses. He says they were Squatch and that there were two of them howling. He also had his opportunity to say that the producers dubbed in substitute sounds... but he didn't say that. So that makes me think we heard what they heard. Coyotes.

William Parcher · 24th June 2011, 05:46 PM

If Bigfoot vocalizations sound just like a coyote then there are going to be problems. Bigfoots are going to be confused when they hear coyotes. Coyotes are going to be confused when they hear Bigfoots.

Tree knocks don't make sense for Bigfoot as communication. Why would you do that if your own voice can carry long distances?

Drewbot · 24th June 2011, 06:08 PM

The natural sounds occur in the wild. There are no bigfoot in the wild.

No bigfooter has been able to locate evidence of bigfoot, this 'evidence' is required to justify continued investment of time, and money in the Bigfoot hobby.

A coyote call is one of the most varied calls heard in the woods at night, they have dozens of different sounds. Yips, howls, locator howls, and others. Most of the general public know only of the standard locator howl (oww OWWWW). The other sounds are tailor-made to be ID'd as bigfoot. The eerie,steange call of a lone Coyote, presented to an angry wife, or a sad child (dad was bigfooting during his/her school play, for example), might purchase some leniency from the doubters.

These coyote ('yotes as the footers like to call them) calls really do sound eerie and awesome to TV viewers.

atpeace · 24th June 2011, 06:12 PM

Originally Posted by LTC8K6

Woo is often a crime, imo. It's also often a terrible ride for those affected by it.

People get scammed out of their money, families are broken up, friendships are ruined, people waste their life savings, grant money is wasted, etc.

People are getting scammed by bigfoot hucksters as we speak.

Whether it's $100K scientific grant money down the toilet, or $50K to buy a fake rubber bigfoot in an ice chest, or $25K for a fake bigfoot movie, or $500 to get close to bigfoot in the woods...it's often money that people or organizations can't afford to waste...

Of course scammers will use anything (woo or through other means) to scam others, but a belief in, meetings around, discussions of, clubs for, research into, etc any paranormal or cryptid is not a crime. And not all bf "experts" "researchers" "hobbyists" or otherwise are necesssarily scammers. For me that is the problem with ALL woo. It is not the woo itself-- let em believe in anything, I don't care. It is the way woo is such an easy scam that sucks. In no way did I say that I think bfing is a good place to put your money. The only claim I tried to make was if the Finding Bigfoot researchers were sincere and cared about sorting fact from speculation and fiction for their admiring public, they would handle everything differently. I mean, I can pick up my dog's crap with a scooper or my hands.

xblade · 24th June 2011, 06:17 PM

Originally Posted by Howie Felterbush

Tell that to the pig.

The pig was into it.

atpeace · 24th June 2011, 06:19 PM

Originally Posted by William Parcher

...Tree knocks don't make sense for Bigfoot as communication. Why would you do that if your own voice can carry long distances?

They seem to like to attribute known primate behaviors to BF. Easier than making up new ones I guess?

xblade · 24th June 2011, 06:21 PM

Quote:

Whether it's $100K scientific grant money down the toilet, or $50K to buy a fake rubber bigfoot in an ice chest, or $25K for a fake bigfoot movie, or $500 to get close to bigfoot in the woods...it's often money that people or organizations can't afford to waste...

Then they probably shouldn't waste it. No one is forcing them to waste money they don't have on fairy tales.

xblade · 24th June 2011, 06:25 PM

Originally Posted by atpeace

They seem to like to attribute known primate behaviors to BF. Easier than making up new ones I guess?

Except that wood knocking is most likely a made up primate attribute, lol. After doing a web search a year or so ago, it seems the only folks who attribute wood knocking to primates are bigfooters.

LTC8K6 · 24th June 2011, 06:36 PM

Originally Posted by xblade

Then they probably shouldn't waste it. No one is forcing them to waste money they don't have on fairy tales.

Well, we shouldn't let con men prey on the gullible if we can help it.

Of course, we are pretty much doing all we can by debunking as much as we can.

atpeace · 24th June 2011, 06:36 PM

Originally Posted by xblade

Except that wood knocking is most likely a made up primate attribute, lol. After doing a web search a year or so ago, it seems the only folks who attribute wood knocking to primates are bigfooters.

*Noted* Another reason not to believe everything I read on the IN without checking it out. I'll see if I can find any reliable source citing.

LTC8K6 · 24th June 2011, 06:44 PM

They must be attracted to baseball games...

atpeace · 24th June 2011, 06:51 PM

page 185 of Meldrum's Legend Meets Science references this type of behavior (drumming on trees, etc) noted by some primatologist. Don't have the book so I can't say what came on the pages before or after . I am not relying on Meldrum's opinion here. Chris Boesch is cited I can find a primatologist from Leipzig Germany by that name and he has a website.

xblade · 25th June 2011, 12:05 PM

Originally Posted by LTC8K6

Well, we shouldn't let con men prey on the gullible if we can help it.

Of course, we are pretty much doing all we can by debunking as much as we can.

I agree, to a point. But I don't think anyone is going broke by believing in bigfoot, as silly as it is. Heck, I'd be willing to bet most people who sign up for bigfoot tours don't even believe he exists, and are just doing it to have something to do.

xblade · 25th June 2011, 12:15 PM

Originally Posted by atpeace

*Noted* Another reason not to believe everything I read on the IN without checking it out. I'll see if I can find any reliable source citing.

The only reason I checked it out is because I noticed a pattern of 9/11 Truthers making up their own facts/science, and saw similar things happening among footers, so one night I decided to check into it, and I couldn't find anything. Now, that doesn't mean it's not there, of course, but if something like that is such a well-known primate attribute, it shouldn't be so hard to find, and there would be more people talking about it than just bigfoot believers.

River · 25th June 2011, 01:46 PM

Originally Posted by xblade

Except that wood knocking is most likely a made up primate attribute, lol. After doing a web search a year or so ago, it seems the only folks who attribute wood knocking to primates are bigfooters.

Yeah those damn bigfooters are attributing that to primates all over the place apparently.

Source:

Quote:

In an 85-square-kilometer swath of rainforest in Côte d'Ivoire's Taï National Park, monkeys call to one another, chimps drum on tree trunks, and tiny antelopes rustle through the underbrush. That's where researchers have been studying primate communities for more than 3 decades.

Source:

Quote:

Chimpanzees are playful and curious creatures that are perfectly designed for their environment; in the wild, they are elusive and normally disappear when they spot a human intruder. Frenzies of excitement which include, pant hooting, screaming and at times drumming on tree trunks are ways chimpanzee communicate or call for contact

Read more: http://www.bukisa.com/articles/34212...#ixzz1QK3Y8tFW

Source:

Quote:

Wild chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes) generate low-frequency sounds that are audible to humans from a distance of at least 1 km away by hitting the buttresses of trees with their hands and feet.

It's pretty well known that some "primates" (that includes humans/footers right?? lol) do indeed beat on trees to communicate or signal with each other. Maybe they're just trying to play moby dick. Or with it? haha. (led zep humor for those that dont get it)

William Parcher · 25th June 2011, 02:17 PM

Originally Posted by River

It's pretty well known that some "primates" (that includes humans/footers right?? lol) do indeed beat on trees to communicate or signal with each other.

My understanding is that chimpanzees will bang on trees with sticks, hands and feet as part of an excited aggressive display which also includes vocalizations and sometimes foliage shaking. I've never heard of tree banging used as a form of communication over distance.

My understanding is that they bang on trees when fighting with each other, fighting with another troop, or when facing predators such as leopards.

mikeyx · 25th June 2011, 02:59 PM

Originally Posted by William Parcher

My understanding is that chimpanzees will bang on trees with sticks, hands and feet as part of an excited aggressive display which also includes vocalizations and sometimes foliage shaking. I've never heard of tree banging used as a form of communication over distance.

My understanding is that they bang on trees when fighting with each other, fighting with another troop, or when facing predators such as leopards.

But.......... they do it, and the high and mighty all knowing so and so was proven wrong. shucks.

The Shrike · 26th June 2011, 09:00 AM

When it suits your needs, equate putative bigfoot behaviors to similar behaviors documented in chimps, gorillas, and orangutans.

When it suits your needs, try to make the case that bigfoot makes fire (little ones), has religion (Christian religion), and speaks a dialect of Spanish that could've been heard in Mexico in the 16th Century. (That is, except for those Gulf Coast bigfoots that speak French.)

William Parcher · 26th June 2011, 12:04 PM

These chimps are certainly capable of picking up sticks but they also seem pretty much inept with using them as clubs or knockers.

xblade · 26th June 2011, 04:38 PM

Originally Posted by River

Yeah those damn bigfooters are attributing that to primates all over the place apparently.

Source:

I didn't say they didn't beat on trees, I said primate wood knocking as claimed by most bigfooters is most likely made up, and I stand by that. I also said that it's mostly bigfooters making the primate wood knocking claim. Click here, and tell me how many non-footer sources you find. Or here. Or here.

From the introduction of one of your source document linked above:

"Long distance nonvocal acoustic signals are rare in primates. Many species incorporate branch-shaking into aggressive displays, but the acoustic aspect of this signal appears secondary to the visual component. The best-described nonvocal acoustic signal among primates is chest beating in mountain gorillas.

Chimpanzees generate accoustic signals by hitting a variety of substrates with their hands and/or feet, including their chests, the ground, tree trunks, and the buttresses of trees.(Goodall)"

I stand by my original statement that tree knocking by primates as described by footers is most likely made up, or at the least, embellished.

Quote:

It's pretty well known that some "primates" (that includes humans/footers right?? lol) do indeed beat on trees to communicate or signal with each other. Maybe they're just trying to play moby dick. Or with it? haha. (led zep humor for those that dont get it)

I'd be willing to bet all the wood knocking as described by footers is being done by humans/footers, and not gorillas or chimpanzees, and certainly not bigfoot. Having said that, I have no doubt that in the history of apes and chimps, there have been some apes or chimps that may have banged on a tree with a piece of wood a time or two. I just don't think it's a well known ape/chimp behavior, any more than smoking is because some apes/chimps have been known to smoke. But of course, as stated earlier, I could be wrong.

atpeace · 26th June 2011, 06:49 PM

Originally Posted by xblade

I didn't say they didn't beat on trees, I said primate wood knocking as claimed by most bigfooters is most likely made up, and I stand by that. I also said that it's mostly bigfooters making the primate wood knocking claim. Click here, and tell me how many non-footer sources you find. Or here. Or here.

From the introduction of one of your source document linked above:

"Long distance nonvocal acoustic signals are rare in primates. Many species incorporate branch-shaking into aggressive displays, but the acoustic aspect of this signal appears secondary to the visual component. The best-described nonvocal acoustic signal among primates is chest beating in mountain gorillas.

Chimpanzees generate accoustic signals by hitting a variety of substrates with their hands and/or feet, including their chests, the ground, tree trunks, and the buttresses of trees.(Goodall)"

I stand by my original statement that tree knocking by primates as described by footers is most likely made up, or at the least, embellished.

I'd be willing to bet all the wood knocking as described by footers is being done by humans/footers, and not gorillas or chimpanzees, and certainly not bigfoot. Having said that, I have no doubt that in the history of apes and chimps, there have been some apes or chimps that may have banged on a tree with a piece of wood a time or two. I just don't think it's a well known ape/chimp behavior, any more than smoking is because some apes/chimps have been known to smoke. But of course, as stated earlier, I could be wrong.

I agree. But isn't that part of the scammer game? Using bits of truth or facts or information to then add truth or credibility or confusion or whatever... to their charade. Though, I realize we are dealing with a made up animal but you get what I mean.

Besides I think bigfoot lore (its habits and behaviors and physical appearance etc) plays out like the game "telephone" between footers.

bolding in quote mine ap

LTC8K6 · 26th June 2011, 07:09 PM

They just said there was chest muscle definition in the Silver Star photos...

LTC8K6 · 26th June 2011, 07:17 PM

They duplicated the photos with Bobo, but they still rationalize it into a bigfoot...

LTC8K6 · 26th June 2011, 07:18 PM

http://www.portlandhikers.org/forum/...p=15490#p15490

LTC8K6 · 26th June 2011, 07:19 PM

Just claimed...Bigfoots commonly whistle, they don't understand words, but they understand gestures...

LTC8K6 · 26th June 2011, 07:21 PM

"that sounds squatchy"

LTC8K6 · 26th June 2011, 07:25 PM

MM just said the Silver Star photos were compelling evidence of bigfoot...

MM also said that squatches mumble like people talking in the woods, right after they heard people talking in the woods...

Apparently, if you hear people talking in the woods, you've actually heard sasquatch.

24th June 2011, 06:12 AM	#362
parnassus Master Poster Join Date: Jan 2010 Location: California Posts: 2,565	Lol conspiracy theory.
	__________________ Never let the data encumber the plausibility. ---paraphrased from David Paulides "It will be politically charged though, I am sure as anytime something like this happens, it will get interesting".---TheMelba

24th June 2011, 07:14 AM	#363
Howie Felterbush Bow Tie Daddy Join Date: Nov 2009 Location: In the twilight, singing all the old lullabies Posts: 5,333	Originally Posted by xblade Not sure why you'd throw climate change denialists in there, considering that's just about the biggest scam going. Even worse, the climate change scam screws all of us, whereas bigfoot doesn't really hurt anyone but those who choose to waste their own money chasing it. Tell that to the pig.
	__________________ "Don't be too offended by the likes of him - I hear he doesn't even own ascots." -JoeyDonuts "I must be more tired than I thought. Howie, you are starting to make sense." -MG1962 "You're a mean old evil cynic. And mean." Halfcentaur

24th June 2011, 08:17 AM	#365
William Parcher Show me the monkey! Join Date: Jul 2005 Posts: 8,504	The Ketchum/DNA discussion is off topic for this thread. It would be more appropriate in the Bigfoot DNA thread.
	__________________ Bigfoot believers and Bigfoot skeptics are both plumb crazy. Each spends more than one minute per year thinking about Bigfoot.

24th June 2011, 09:21 AM	#366
William Parcher Show me the monkey! Join Date: Jul 2005 Posts: 8,504	Originally Posted by C_Felix On a message board, Crytomundo I believe, Matt Moneymaker is claiming that the producers of the show are editing it in a style that makes it sensational and therefore missing the real science they are doing. Originally Posted by William Parcher What real science are they doing? Originally Posted by C_Felix I really don't know. But, I'd like to at least give them the benefit of the doubt when it comes to knowing how and where to set up camera traps and what not. I'm sure if they could land some "real" footage of bigfoot, something that would have people really wondering, I'm sure they monetary payoff would be huge. That might just be a tad bit of a motivator. We are talking about BFRO guys who are also on the Finding Bigfoot cast. It is apparent that the producers are allowing these guys to bring previously acquired evidence to the show. These are things like the McKenzie River video, the road crossing video from Georgia, the glass door handprint, mud prints on the street, etc. The BFRO had already approved these things as being good evidence for Bigfoot before they were included in the program. The BFRO seems to be pulling from their good stuff which has been presented to them from people across the country. We know that the Silver Star Mountain photos are coming up in another episode. The program has not shown the Jacobs Creature trail camera pics, Memorial Day video, New York baby video, Freeman video, Skookum Cast, etc. but these could be used for future episodes. I suspect that the BFRO would name the PGF as being the best evidence for Bigfoot so far to date. Maybe they will somehow work that into a future episode. So the producers don't seem to be preventing the BFRO guys from showing their good stuff from the past as well as letting them use high-technology during their outings for the program itself. Are you saying that the producers aren't, but should, allow the guys to put up some camera traps so that they can get pictures or video which are way better than anything previously acquired?
	__________________ Bigfoot believers and Bigfoot skeptics are both plumb crazy. Each spends more than one minute per year thinking about Bigfoot.

24th June 2011, 09:35 AM	#367
Drewbot Illuminator Join Date: Sep 2007 Posts: 3,846	I wonder if they will talk about the piles of Ice and wood chips that they found on one expedition. I think Bartlojays was defending those on BFF. (The ice/wood chips were thought to be BIGFOOT refrigerators) http://www.bfro.net/news/roundup/sie...now_mounds.asp Sierra Snow Mounds
Drewbot Illuminator Join Date: Sep 2007 Posts: 3,846	__________________ "I dont call that evolution, I call that the survival of the fittest." - Bulletmaker "I thought skeptics would usually point towards a hoax rather than a group being duped." - makaya325 Kit is not a skeptic. He is a former Bigfoot believer that changed his position to that of non believer.- Crowlogic Last edited by Drewbot; 24th June 2011 at 09:39 AM.

23rd June 2011, 11:20 PM	#361
xblade Critical Thinker Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: Greenville, NC Posts: 459	Originally Posted by parnassus I agree but what can you do? Hopefully peer review will expose the nonsense but it will undoubtedly be published somewhere. Science is just not very good at dealing with hoaxers. The believers are typically climate change denialists, conspiracy theorists, paranormalists etc without a college degree. They have no idea about probability, statistics, anatomy, zoology or genetics. The exploiters are making money feeding them what they want to hear. Not sure why you'd throw climate change denialists in there, considering that's just about the biggest scam going. Even worse, the climate change scam screws all of us, whereas bigfoot doesn't really hurt anyone but those who choose to waste their own money chasing it.

24th June 2011, 08:06 AM	#364
The Shrike Graduate Poster Join Date: Nov 2009 Location: USA Posts: 1,804	Originally Posted by parnassus a. There are some pretty bad journals in my field and i suspect in other fields as well. b. It probably hinges on the honesty and credibility of those who submitted the samples. Well, the bone sample apparently came from these loons, and the "tissue sample" is supposedly from a habituation site in Vermont. What kind of reject from a turnip truck could not see the importance of confirming the provenance of these samples? This seems far sketchier than anything Meldrum used for his ichnotaxon paper.

24th June 2011, 10:32 AM	#368
parnassus Master Poster Join Date: Jan 2010 Location: California Posts: 2,565	Originally Posted by Drewbot I wonder if they will talk about the piles of Ice and wood chips that they found on one expedition. I think Bartlojays was defending those on BFF. (The ice/wood chips were thought to be BIGFOOT refrigerators) http://www.bfro.net/news/roundup/sie...now_mounds.asp Sierra Snow Mounds Wow that snow "mound" stuff is some hilarious "finding bigfoot" type baloney. Isn't this the same Robert Leiterman who hikes around Bluff Creek with BFBM ??
	__________________ Never let the data encumber the plausibility. ---paraphrased from David Paulides "It will be politically charged though, I am sure as anytime something like this happens, it will get interesting".---TheMelba

24th June 2011, 02:06 PM	#369
atpeace Guest Join Date: May 2009 Posts: 208	Originally Posted by GT/CS The part I bolded can never occur because any decent researcher quickly figures out that there is no such animal as bigfoot. All that's left are the crooks and the wackos. *All* that is left are the crooks and wackos? I don't believe that. I am not a wacko or a crook yet I was very curious at one time and so have/are many others who are not crooks or wackos. And just how quickly would he "figure it out" as a done deal? My point is how "woo" is handled. Its a free country woo isn't a crime. It is going to exist.
atpeace Guest Join Date: May 2009 Posts: 208

24th June 2011, 02:34 PM	#370
GT/CS Illuminator Join Date: Jul 2007 Posts: 3,591	Do you claim to be a bigfoot researcher or a bigfoot expert? Do you sell your supposed bigfoot expertise? We're talking about so-called researchers, not everyday people. Anyone who seriously studies the bigfoot phenomenom quickly learns that there is no solid evidence for bigfoot and therefore the beast does not exist. The 'researchers' who claim to be experts are in it for the fame and/or the money, or other reasons, one of which is mental instability. So what it comes down to is some are knowingly living a lie and the others are unknowingly living a lie.
GT/CS Illuminator Join Date: Jul 2007 Posts: 3,591	__________________ SweatyYeti or Bill Munns would be my vote for looking at this - BFSleuth @ BFF I've got plenty of common sense! I just choose to ignore it. - Calvin; October 15, 1986

24th June 2011, 02:42 PM	#371
parnassus Master Poster Join Date: Jan 2010 Location: California Posts: 2,565	bigfootery is a scam, a money-making deception, and a misleading idea for school chuildren. If it were presented like Bambi and Cinderella no one would care. Some threads at JREF are devoted to cold fusion, some to quackery, some to bigfoot, some to religion, etc. Take your pick. It's a free country. Counter-woo should and will be available. Don't like it? Don't read it. Simple.
	__________________ Never let the data encumber the plausibility. ---paraphrased from David Paulides "It will be politically charged though, I am sure as anytime something like this happens, it will get interesting".---TheMelba

24th June 2011, 02:50 PM	#372
atpeace Guest Join Date: May 2009 Posts: 208	Originally Posted by GT/CS Do you claim to be a bigfoot researcher or a bigfoot expert? Do you sell your supposed bigfoot expertise? We're talking about so-called researchers, not everyday people. Anyone who seriously studies the bigfoot phenomenom quickly learns that there is no solid evidence for bigfoot and therefore the beast does not exist. The 'researchers' who claim to be experts are in it for the fame and/or the money, or other reasons, one of which is mental instability. So what it comes down to is some are knowingly living a lie and the others are unknowingly living a lie. Yes, but at any given time your are going to have woo and those investigating woo. So at any time you may have a sincere researcher. And corrrectly, that researcher would probably not be one for long, but research will still continuously be happening. And can be nothing like the researchers and research on Finging Bigfoot, etc. Again, my point is about how this continuing bf phenomon is handled by researchers. And yes, I am an expert on bigfoot and would claim such. There is no one definition of "an expert on bigfoot".
atpeace Guest Join Date: May 2009 Posts: 208

24th June 2011, 04:21 PM	#373
LTC8K6 Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: Directly under a deadly chemtrail Posts: 12,616	Woo is often a crime, imo. It's also often a terrible ride for those affected by it. People get scammed out of their money, families are broken up, friendships are ruined, people waste their life savings, grant money is wasted, etc. People are getting scammed by bigfoot hucksters as we speak. Whether it's $100K scientific grant money down the toilet, or $50K to buy a fake rubber bigfoot in an ice chest, or $25K for a fake bigfoot movie, or $500 to get close to bigfoot in the woods...it's often money that people or organizations can't afford to waste...
	__________________ What a fool believes, no wise man has the power to reason away. What seems to be, is always better than nothing. 2 prints, same midtarsal crock..., I mean break? Last edited by LTC8K6; 24th June 2011 at 04:23 PM.

24th June 2011, 04:35 PM	#374
William Parcher Show me the monkey! Join Date: Jul 2005 Posts: 8,504	Barackman reviews the Oregon episode. All those people who raised their hands at the Beer & Bigfoot tavern gathering and were later featured were folks who had already submitted their encounters to BFRO before the episode filming. Cliff even says that one of the fishing guys (with the red-eyed Bigfoot encounter) was already a friend of his. So those people weren't random strangers met at the tavern. They had already been BFRO approved. Cliff talks about the recorded "coyote" responses. He says they were Squatch and that there were two of them howling. He also had his opportunity to say that the producers dubbed in substitute sounds... but he didn't say that. So that makes me think we heard what they heard. Coyotes.
	__________________ Bigfoot believers and Bigfoot skeptics are both plumb crazy. Each spends more than one minute per year thinking about Bigfoot.

24th June 2011, 05:46 PM	#375
William Parcher Show me the monkey! Join Date: Jul 2005 Posts: 8,504	If Bigfoot vocalizations sound just like a coyote then there are going to be problems. Bigfoots are going to be confused when they hear coyotes. Coyotes are going to be confused when they hear Bigfoots. Tree knocks don't make sense for Bigfoot as communication. Why would you do that if your own voice can carry long distances?
	__________________ Bigfoot believers and Bigfoot skeptics are both plumb crazy. Each spends more than one minute per year thinking about Bigfoot.

24th June 2011, 06:08 PM	#376
Drewbot Illuminator Join Date: Sep 2007 Posts: 3,846	The natural sounds occur in the wild. There are no bigfoot in the wild. No bigfooter has been able to locate evidence of bigfoot, this 'evidence' is required to justify continued investment of time, and money in the Bigfoot hobby. A coyote call is one of the most varied calls heard in the woods at night, they have dozens of different sounds. Yips, howls, locator howls, and others. Most of the general public know only of the standard locator howl (oww OWWWW). The other sounds are tailor-made to be ID'd as bigfoot. The eerie,steange call of a lone Coyote, presented to an angry wife, or a sad child (dad was bigfooting during his/her school play, for example), might purchase some leniency from the doubters. These coyote ('yotes as the footers like to call them) calls really do sound eerie and awesome to TV viewers.
Drewbot Illuminator Join Date: Sep 2007 Posts: 3,846	__________________ "I dont call that evolution, I call that the survival of the fittest." - Bulletmaker "I thought skeptics would usually point towards a hoax rather than a group being duped." - makaya325 Kit is not a skeptic. He is a former Bigfoot believer that changed his position to that of non believer.- Crowlogic

24th June 2011, 06:12 PM	#377
atpeace Guest Join Date: May 2009 Posts: 208	Originally Posted by LTC8K6 Woo is often a crime, imo. It's also often a terrible ride for those affected by it. People get scammed out of their money, families are broken up, friendships are ruined, people waste their life savings, grant money is wasted, etc. People are getting scammed by bigfoot hucksters as we speak. Whether it's $100K scientific grant money down the toilet, or $50K to buy a fake rubber bigfoot in an ice chest, or $25K for a fake bigfoot movie, or $500 to get close to bigfoot in the woods...it's often money that people or organizations can't afford to waste... Of course scammers will use anything (woo or through other means) to scam others, but a belief in, meetings around, discussions of, clubs for, research into, etc any paranormal or cryptid is not a crime. And not all bf "experts" "researchers" "hobbyists" or otherwise are necesssarily scammers. For me that is the problem with ALL woo. It is not the woo itself-- let em believe in anything, I don't care. It is the way woo is such an easy scam that sucks. In no way did I say that I think bfing is a good place to put your money. The only claim I tried to make was if the Finding Bigfoot researchers were sincere and cared about sorting fact from speculation and fiction for their admiring public, they would handle everything differently. I mean, I can pick up my dog's crap with a scooper or my hands.
atpeace Guest Join Date: May 2009 Posts: 208

24th June 2011, 06:17 PM	#378
xblade Critical Thinker Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: Greenville, NC Posts: 459	Originally Posted by Howie Felterbush Tell that to the pig. The pig was into it.

24th June 2011, 06:19 PM	#379
atpeace Guest Join Date: May 2009 Posts: 208	Originally Posted by William Parcher ...Tree knocks don't make sense for Bigfoot as communication. Why would you do that if your own voice can carry long distances? They seem to like to attribute known primate behaviors to BF. Easier than making up new ones I guess?
atpeace Guest Join Date: May 2009 Posts: 208

24th June 2011, 06:21 PM	#380
xblade Critical Thinker Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: Greenville, NC Posts: 459	Quote: Whether it's $100K scientific grant money down the toilet, or $50K to buy a fake rubber bigfoot in an ice chest, or $25K for a fake bigfoot movie, or $500 to get close to bigfoot in the woods...it's often money that people or organizations can't afford to waste... Then they probably shouldn't waste it. No one is forcing them to waste money they don't have on fairy tales.

24th June 2011, 06:25 PM	#381
xblade Critical Thinker Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: Greenville, NC Posts: 459	Originally Posted by atpeace They seem to like to attribute known primate behaviors to BF. Easier than making up new ones I guess? Except that wood knocking is most likely a made up primate attribute, lol. After doing a web search a year or so ago, it seems the only folks who attribute wood knocking to primates are bigfooters.

24th June 2011, 06:36 PM	#382
LTC8K6 Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: Directly under a deadly chemtrail Posts: 12,616	Originally Posted by xblade Then they probably shouldn't waste it. No one is forcing them to waste money they don't have on fairy tales. Well, we shouldn't let con men prey on the gullible if we can help it. Of course, we are pretty much doing all we can by debunking as much as we can.
	__________________ What a fool believes, no wise man has the power to reason away. What seems to be, is always better than nothing. 2 prints, same midtarsal crock..., I mean break?

24th June 2011, 06:36 PM	#383
atpeace Guest Join Date: May 2009 Posts: 208	Originally Posted by xblade Except that wood knocking is most likely a made up primate attribute, lol. After doing a web search a year or so ago, it seems the only folks who attribute wood knocking to primates are bigfooters. Noted Another reason not to believe everything I read on the IN without checking it out. I'll see if I can find any reliable source citing.
atpeace Guest Join Date: May 2009 Posts: 208

24th June 2011, 06:44 PM	#384
LTC8K6 Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: Directly under a deadly chemtrail Posts: 12,616	They must be attracted to baseball games...
	__________________ What a fool believes, no wise man has the power to reason away. What seems to be, is always better than nothing. 2 prints, same midtarsal crock..., I mean break?

24th June 2011, 06:51 PM	#385
atpeace Guest Join Date: May 2009 Posts: 208	page 185 of Meldrum's Legend Meets Science references this type of behavior (drumming on trees, etc) noted by some primatologist. Don't have the book so I can't say what came on the pages before or after . I am not relying on Meldrum's opinion here. Chris Boesch is cited I can find a primatologist from Leipzig Germany by that name and he has a website.
atpeace Guest Join Date: May 2009 Posts: 208

25th June 2011, 12:05 PM	#386
xblade Critical Thinker Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: Greenville, NC Posts: 459	Originally Posted by LTC8K6 Well, we shouldn't let con men prey on the gullible if we can help it. Of course, we are pretty much doing all we can by debunking as much as we can. I agree, to a point. But I don't think anyone is going broke by believing in bigfoot, as silly as it is. Heck, I'd be willing to bet most people who sign up for bigfoot tours don't even believe he exists, and are just doing it to have something to do.

25th June 2011, 12:15 PM	#387
xblade Critical Thinker Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: Greenville, NC Posts: 459	Originally Posted by atpeace Noted Another reason not to believe everything I read on the IN without checking it out. I'll see if I can find any reliable source citing. The only reason I checked it out is because I noticed a pattern of 9/11 Truthers making up their own facts/science, and saw similar things happening among footers, so one night I decided to check into it, and I couldn't find anything. Now, that doesn't mean it's not there, of course, but if something like that is such a well-known primate attribute, it shouldn't be so hard to find, and there would be more people talking about it than just bigfoot believers.

25th June 2011, 01:46 PM	#388
River Master Poster Join Date: Mar 2009 Posts: 2,639	Originally Posted by xblade Except that wood knocking is most likely a made up primate attribute, lol. After doing a web search a year or so ago, it seems the only folks who attribute wood knocking to primates are bigfooters. Yeah those damn bigfooters are attributing that to primates all over the place apparently. Source: Quote: In an 85-square-kilometer swath of rainforest in Côte d'Ivoire's Taï National Park, monkeys call to one another, chimps drum on tree trunks, and tiny antelopes rustle through the underbrush. That's where researchers have been studying primate communities for more than 3 decades. Source: Quote: Chimpanzees are playful and curious creatures that are perfectly designed for their environment; in the wild, they are elusive and normally disappear when they spot a human intruder. Frenzies of excitement which include, pant hooting, screaming and at times drumming on tree trunks are ways chimpanzee communicate or call for contact Read more: http://www.bukisa.com/articles/34212...#ixzz1QK3Y8tFW Source: Quote: Wild chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes) generate low-frequency sounds that are audible to humans from a distance of at least 1 km away by hitting the buttresses of trees with their hands and feet. It's pretty well known that some "primates" (that includes humans/footers right?? lol) do indeed beat on trees to communicate or signal with each other. Maybe they're just trying to play moby dick. Or with it? haha. (led zep humor for those that dont get it)
River Master Poster Join Date: Mar 2009 Posts: 2,639

25th June 2011, 02:17 PM	#389
William Parcher Show me the monkey! Join Date: Jul 2005 Posts: 8,504	Originally Posted by River It's pretty well known that some "primates" (that includes humans/footers right?? lol) do indeed beat on trees to communicate or signal with each other. My understanding is that chimpanzees will bang on trees with sticks, hands and feet as part of an excited aggressive display which also includes vocalizations and sometimes foliage shaking. I've never heard of tree banging used as a form of communication over distance. My understanding is that they bang on trees when fighting with each other, fighting with another troop, or when facing predators such as leopards.
	__________________ Bigfoot believers and Bigfoot skeptics are both plumb crazy. Each spends more than one minute per year thinking about Bigfoot.

25th June 2011, 02:59 PM	#390
mikeyx Banned Join Date: Oct 2007 Posts: 3,570	Originally Posted by William Parcher My understanding is that chimpanzees will bang on trees with sticks, hands and feet as part of an excited aggressive display which also includes vocalizations and sometimes foliage shaking. I've never heard of tree banging used as a form of communication over distance. My understanding is that they bang on trees when fighting with each other, fighting with another troop, or when facing predators such as leopards. But.......... they do it, and the high and mighty all knowing so and so was proven wrong. shucks.
mikeyx Banned Join Date: Oct 2007 Posts: 3,570

26th June 2011, 09:00 AM	#391
The Shrike Graduate Poster Join Date: Nov 2009 Location: USA Posts: 1,804	When it suits your needs, equate putative bigfoot behaviors to similar behaviors documented in chimps, gorillas, and orangutans. When it suits your needs, try to make the case that bigfoot makes fire (little ones), has religion (Christian religion), and speaks a dialect of Spanish that could've been heard in Mexico in the 16th Century. (That is, except for those Gulf Coast bigfoots that speak French.)

26th June 2011, 12:04 PM	#392
William Parcher Show me the monkey! Join Date: Jul 2005 Posts: 8,504	These chimps are certainly capable of picking up sticks but they also seem pretty much inept with using them as clubs or knockers.
	__________________ Bigfoot believers and Bigfoot skeptics are both plumb crazy. Each spends more than one minute per year thinking about Bigfoot.

26th June 2011, 04:38 PM	#393
xblade Critical Thinker Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: Greenville, NC Posts: 459	Originally Posted by River Yeah those damn bigfooters are attributing that to primates all over the place apparently. Source: I didn't say they didn't beat on trees, I said primate wood knocking as claimed by most bigfooters is most likely made up, and I stand by that. I also said that it's mostly bigfooters making the primate wood knocking claim. Click here, and tell me how many non-footer sources you find. Or here. Or here. From the introduction of one of your source document linked above: "Long distance nonvocal acoustic signals are rare in primates. Many species incorporate branch-shaking into aggressive displays, but the acoustic aspect of this signal appears secondary to the visual component. The best-described nonvocal acoustic signal among primates is chest beating in mountain gorillas. Chimpanzees generate accoustic signals by hitting a variety of substrates with their hands and/or feet, including their chests, the ground, tree trunks, and the buttresses of trees.(Goodall)" I stand by my original statement that tree knocking by primates as described by footers is most likely made up, or at the least, embellished. Quote: It's pretty well known that some "primates" (that includes humans/footers right?? lol) do indeed beat on trees to communicate or signal with each other. Maybe they're just trying to play moby dick. Or with it? haha. (led zep humor for those that dont get it) I'd be willing to bet all the wood knocking as described by footers is being done by humans/footers, and not gorillas or chimpanzees, and certainly not bigfoot. Having said that, I have no doubt that in the history of apes and chimps, there have been some apes or chimps that may have banged on a tree with a piece of wood a time or two. I just don't think it's a well known ape/chimp behavior, any more than smoking is because some apes/chimps have been known to smoke. But of course, as stated earlier, I could be wrong.
	Last edited by xblade; 26th June 2011 at 04:48 PM.

26th June 2011, 06:49 PM	#394
atpeace Guest Join Date: May 2009 Posts: 208	Originally Posted by xblade I didn't say they didn't beat on trees, I said primate wood knocking as claimed by most bigfooters is most likely made up, and I stand by that. I also said that it's mostly bigfooters making the primate wood knocking claim. Click here, and tell me how many non-footer sources you find. Or here. Or here. From the introduction of one of your source document linked above: "Long distance nonvocal acoustic signals are rare in primates. Many species incorporate branch-shaking into aggressive displays, but the acoustic aspect of this signal appears secondary to the visual component. The best-described nonvocal acoustic signal among primates is chest beating in mountain gorillas. Chimpanzees generate accoustic signals by hitting a variety of substrates with their hands and/or feet, including their chests, the ground, tree trunks, and the buttresses of trees.(Goodall)" I stand by my original statement that tree knocking by primates as described by footers is most likely made up, or at the least, embellished. I'd be willing to bet all the wood knocking as described by footers is being done by humans/footers, and not gorillas or chimpanzees, and certainly not bigfoot. Having said that, I have no doubt that in the history of apes and chimps, there have been some apes or chimps that may have banged on a tree with a piece of wood a time or two. I just don't think it's a well known ape/chimp behavior, any more than smoking is because some apes/chimps have been known to smoke. But of course, as stated earlier, I could be wrong. I agree. But isn't that part of the scammer game? Using bits of truth or facts or information to then add truth or credibility or confusion or whatever... to their charade. Though, I realize we are dealing with a made up animal but you get what I mean. Besides I think bigfoot lore (its habits and behaviors and physical appearance etc) plays out like the game "telephone" between footers. bolding in quote mine ap
atpeace Guest Join Date: May 2009 Posts: 208	Last edited by atpeace; 26th June 2011 at 06:52 PM.

26th June 2011, 07:09 PM	#395
LTC8K6 Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: Directly under a deadly chemtrail Posts: 12,616	They just said there was chest muscle definition in the Silver Star photos...
	__________________ What a fool believes, no wise man has the power to reason away. What seems to be, is always better than nothing. 2 prints, same midtarsal crock..., I mean break?