Over the last few years, we hear more and more from folks describing these animals on their property. A good example is a recent thread on the GCBRO where the poster talks about two bf looking at he/she across the carport. That person talks to them as well. If you read that thread you'll notice a few other folks talk about their animals as well. Of course the Coy claims and now the Malaysian folks are in that same boat, including our friend CoastalYeti who leans the same way.

It always amazes me that folks make these claims, especially if they aren't true. Why would they do that and go to so much effort (like writing a book) if it's all bs? I know of course that some want their name in lights but really, they always risk losing their integrity and worse, their honour in the end. Maybe those stories are true!?! If they are, there must be a way to obtain evidence and to deal with these claims wisely. Surely if those animals are that rampant, someone or some group could verify those claims. I wonder if anyone on this forum has these experiences that they swear on their honour is true? If so, I wonder how you think the rest of us should react and what next steps should be taken to obtain evidence from your claim of habituation or continued sightings?

t.

Terry,

I don't know, I can't figure it out either. You have to wonder if their claims are true and they put them up for public opinion, that eventually someone would want proof. Although maybe they don't give a damn about what anyone thinks and it is what it is to them, period.

Recently I been reading all the Track Records from the last to first and sometimes I shake my head thinking, what the hell are they smoking? I certainly don't have the answers, and so the mystery continues.

Sunflower

Moved to the "Coastalyeti exerpts" thread.

BSF

Quite a few of these folks sound quite intelligent in their claims and actually sound normal. I suppose the old addage, if only one of these folks are telling the truth, then there is habituation going on or there are bf animals listening from across the car port. I notice folks with these claims tend to flock to the sites that have there own unique stories. To bad one of these folks wouldn't show up here who was telling the truth and who could intelligently take the criticism and respond calmly. I'm sure if a bf family was throwing things around in my yard, that I could take all of the abuse headed my way, only because I was telling the truth and knew what I was talking about. It would be tough but an honest person could pervail I think.

t.

Good for you, Terry. lot's of people couldn't give a rat's a$$ about the scientific signifigance of proving the existence of bigfoot. They don't like 'monsters' lurking in the dark, and some are not all that fond of being debased by total strangers. Their stories are not worth having, if they can't face the 'all the abuse' headed their way. My attention really tends to fade out when someone mentions 'habituated' Sasquatch. Guess it might be possible, but, the 'Coy claims', and others, have attached a real negative feeling to the idea, in my mind.

BSF

Just like other sightings from "credible" witnesses, some of these must be valid. (I do not think they are all hoaxes). My only other question is could some witnesses dream these encounters or be under the influence of some type of substance or simply be mistaken? I still believe that some of these stories have to be true. Which ones....?

I edited the name of the thread so people wouldn't break their necks getting here to the hab-it-you-ated bigfoot stories.

If, in fact the reporting party(s) are hoaxing, which would lead to discovery of their fraudulent claims, and the subsequent dishonor you mention, the fabrication and reasons for facilitating such obviously shows that they had no dignity to compromise anyway.


The whole reason I have been spending time in the CY thread is because I'm so intrigued by the fact that people have varied reasons for believing him, moreover that they give any credence whatsoever
to any story, let alone his, that does not have a supportive evidentiary foundaton.

Ss what, we just ignore the whole thing until someone brings in a body?

Without proof, I doubt it. You'd just be another person with another story.

Not a body neccesarily. But for the level of activity descibed for that many years. One decent print cast, hair sample or picture that didn't require a red circle around it would be a start.

Can't argue with that, Jim. But, we have to work with what we have, which is unfortunately, not a whole lot.

Yeah..but thats our fault for the most part. Habituation or just plain sighting for the most part , despite claiming to be 'looking for bigfoot' how many go prepared? If I go out and say I saw evidence of a sasquatch footprint, while out looking for bigfoot, I better damn well have a camera and tape measure with me, to at least show I made an attempt to document it. If not I'd fully expect to post in on this forum and face derision over it.

If it happened to me with as great a frequency as some would have us believe, after about the third time, if no one called me a liar at that point, or questioned my judgement over it, then i'd really start to worry that the given course we're on isn't going to change for another 100 or so years.

Jim:
I guess that is the dilemma. I personally would much rather go along, be their 'friend' to a point. I don't mean that in a phony way at all. I may have very serious doubts, but if they feel I don't trust them, they are going to be very careful in what they say. And I really do want to know if there is any basis in their tale. Once the whole story is out, recap, bring out inconsistencies and outright 180's in what they have said. Here we have that in black and white, so there is no denying what they said. Make sense?
BSF

Basically, yes. Or conclusive photographic or video evidence. We have casts, footprints, hairs, s**t, even photos and video that haven't proven anything.

There are thousands of web sites where we can peruse amazing stories. Here on the board we have a thread with a zillion scary BF tales, and I like reading them. But, it does nothing to show me that BF exists. Literary entertainment and science are two diff things altogether. In our BF subculture, crossing the two has not yielded anything concrete, yet. Hopefully, if Wardog meets him, CY won't point to the gravesite as being under a shopping mall, lol.

Alot of that has already been done. I've met several dozen people that reported bigfoot sightings and trust wasn't an issue. Nor was friendship. It may sound cold but in a way, a bigfoot 'interview' is like a job interview .In many ways its simly a buisiness like transaction , they report (apply), you investigate (interview) and make your judgement , for all intents and purposes to what they say how they react to questions, is the area even viable for what they claim? Was it at the time of the alleged happening? There are a lot more factors that comeinto play, to many to list in a lot of ways.


Here the difference is ,nonsistencies, truths, red flags ,belief tones, and attitudes are just that over all ,as you said, words on a screen. The person making the report in a format such as this has the time to go back, verify answers, make sure thier story fits whats said etc while remaining anonymous to the vast majority that they've posted thier report to for consideration. In real time, they don't get that option.

Looking at it from the perpective employer interview as noted above, are you going to hire someone you have doubts about after reviewing their application and seeing problems in relation to what they said ? What if they say something on that application you can verify and it never shows up ? Or they don't want to talk about it or account for it? Do you hire them then? Most of the experience I have that relates to bigfoot comes from interviews like this I've done in one form or another over nearly the last two decades. Does it apply? Dunno. But it's what I know, what I applied and what I continue to learn from in one form or another.

I know that with some of the stories that get posted in regards to bigfoot encounters that get reported on this forum and other internet sources, I would have set the application aside and chosen another to potentially hire. Might be just me, but that's kinda how I see it.

Have any of you read this book:



The Locals by Thom Powell? He spends some time detailing an interesting and somewhat more reasonable case of habituation than most of the sensationalized cases you hear about. In this case, a rural family takes care of various animals and grow vegitables on a farm-like homestead. They have events where outside storage containers are opened by something with human-like hands (in terms of functionality) and have other signs and direct sightings of apparent sasquatch, especially juvinile ones.

Fantastic claims need fantastic evidence. Otherwise they are just good stories.

Going back to the interview scenario mentioned before; I run my own business. If someone has put down that he has great work experience in his background and I can't verify it then they're toast. Same with BF claims.

Show me the money......or in this case......the monkey! :new_rolleyessmileyanim:

It is an interesting point, I read much of the CY thread and I enjoy reading & mentaly picturing the scene,I don't belive it but like the story. Perfect example, I have a very good freind who has never given me any reason to doubt anything he says, he was in the Army,been in both Iraq wars & Afghanistan, has been brutally honest with all that he has told of combat, even though at times it is unfavorable to him. So one day he was down here visiting from where he lives now (Northern CA) and he tells me he saw something on the powerline road that runs along the back of his dad's property,and that he saw it more than once and it ends there, he tells the story, but not until he gets some sort of proof that he feels is compelling enough to put up will he put it out there for review he says. He has put up game cams and stuff but after 16 months,nothing. He found what he thought was an impression of a foot but said it was worthless and won't even talk about it and has pretty much given up and got on with his life, I urged him to at least post up what he thought he saw on here just to kind of get it off his chest, but he said "no way don't want any attention." I think the opposite is true for others.

There are a lot more explanations than either 'they're lying' or 'they're telling the truth'. Folks like us trust logic and reason. But there are people who regard logic as "Western reductionism". These folks have no problem telling tall tales to make a point and see nothing wrong with it. Then you have mental anomalies that prevent people from grasping reality. So there are actually several ways people can tell stories of things that never happened and not feel any guilt about it. They may actually say the things did happen based on their philosophy.

Don't know that I was exactly trying to compare the process to an employment interview, but I can tell you this: If I appear before any of you for a job interview, and you decide to insult me, or call me a liar, I WILL insult you back, and LOUDLY. I WANT your secretary to hear what I call you.
And, at least the prospective employer has the possibility of financial benefit to (maybe) hold the interviewee captive, sedentary through the assault.

Let me give a few examples:

You: "You say that you were lead widget inspector for Spacely Sprockets for 15 years, yet I could not substantiate this. Can you prove it?"

Me: "No Sir, I can't. Mr spacely passed away a few years ago, the company was dissolved, and all records were burned in a fire since."

Reply scenario one:

You: "Well, I am sorry, but without proof, I can't accept this as fact."

Me: "I understand, Sir. Sorry to waste your time."

Reply Scenario two:

You: "I don't believe a word of this. My BS meter is pegged. You never worked for spacely, and you wouldn't know a widget from a figamajig."

Me (poker-faced, in a loud but calm voice):"Is that your wife and children in the picture? Are the kids adopted or was it artificial insemination? I do not believe for one second that woman, or any other, would willingly participate in the act of conception with a subhuman -BLEEP- such as yourself."

BSF

I agree with BSF's statement above.

The BFF isn't an investigatory organization. That statement is diven home by the way prospective witnesses are treated here on the forum with the "I don't believe you, you're lying." comments, throwing down the gauntlet, even before the prospective witness has finished his/her account of the alleged event(s). In all of the interviews I did with the BFRO <bleck patooie> if I'd stopped the witness midway through the account and told them "I think you're lying. I don't believe you." Probably the majority of them would have told me to take a flying leap and to take my organization with me. I'm not saying skepticism shouldn't apply, but professionalism and courtesy needs to accompany it or you make your entire organization look bad, not only to that witness, but by word of mouth to every other potential witness the first witness tells. Objectivity, professionalism, courtesy, and a healthy amount of common sense is just a better way for me rather than blunt skepticism. If I make my organization look bad with my behavior during an interview, I'm not doing the research any favors in my opinion. I'm talking about myself, not all of us are in organizations. Is there anything to gain by telling a witness on a forum they're lying? What would be gained by telling a witness during an interview they're lying, other than to end the conversation. I don't believe a lot of what's said, it's just not important to me to throw that BS flag like an official in the NFL. Most of the time if it looks like blatant BS I just leave it alone. I didn't always do that, but I find that's a better way for me. Some of you may disagree and most likely, probably will.

To me, an employment interview doesn't fit. I think what goes on here is less like an employment inteview and more like a trial where the witnesses are grilled until they go into hiding. An interview doesn't amount to a trial or inquisition and we don't all have to act like Hollywood prosecuting attorneys reducing witnesses to piles of quivering sobbing flesh wondering why they ever came forward in the first place. By the same token, it appears at least to me that there is an element here on the BFF who strives to be the first to throw out the BS flag. Is there a prize for that?

The people with a story to tell don't have to come forward, they have nothing virtuous to gain by doing so. In all of the years of the BF phenomenon only two have come forward with footage that appears authentic. Even that is debated every day. Witnesses don't have any proof. We don't have any proof and we're looking for it. We're demanding proof from people with a story when we don't have any ourselves. If people stop coming forward for fear of a mob verbally beating them to death then the research grinds down since most of what we do in my opinion depends on people coming forward and letting us know they have had a sighting or encounter of some sort. Without them we just keep plugging away like we've always been doing and debating the PG film.

If what I've said here makes me one of the ignorant believing horde ruining the BFF with our "romanticism" taking everyone with a story at their word, then I guess that's just me. I haven't said I believed anyone's story, only that I'd like to take the respectful approach at getting to the meat of the alleged encounter.

"Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence." That should not be the anthem by which we conduct ourselves as humans nor should it be the foundation of our conduct.

JIMF-
I think you called me last week about meeting up.
I left you a message saying I'm good during the week.
But havent heard from you since.

Any way, I agree, I think if you are going to promote something as the truth, without any physical proof, then you are going to be look upon as a kook. That is why I am going to take a DNA sample if I ever get close enough to him.

I would also like to propose that many sightings are near-sleep hallucinations.
Many of them take place at night in a car, and as many of you might know, driving a car late at night, you can see some pretty weird things if you are tired. I don't know how many car accidents are reported where the driver says he/she swerved to avoid a tire in the road, or a dog in the road, and upon investigation, there is no tire in the road, and they simply hallucinated the tire in the road and fell asleep.

All have something to gain by contributing to the forum, or any online panel. You get people that think they are smart, and patronize others, they get off on the "know it all" syndrome. You have people that are dignified, and relay their stories with the intent to educate and learn. You also have ignorant people that mean well, but lack the wherewithal to purvey their contributions with assertive elocution. Lastly, you have people on the gutter the side of the social scale, who have twisted agendas, these same people having unnatural and sick criteria for even associating with others. Virtuosity, as you've mentioned, Ars, is gained by all four, within their own distinctive perspectives.

The only reason we're spending days in the sister CY thread, is because CY's stories sound like bullshit, and his lack of evidence smells like bullshit. It's not because they sound reasonable, truthful and logical. One positive thing has transpired since Sojourner initiated that thread, and that is a lot of us (myself an exception) give him the benefit of the doubt and wait with our fingers crossed, while Wardog waits to facilitate the meeting. At this point, no one loves or hates CY, but as soon as he stepped into this forum, he was left with three invariable, inevitable and guaranteed choices, which he cannot deny:

1. Proving that his stories are true.
2. Disappearing.
3. Through process of elimination, prove that he is lying.

If CY proves me wrong, and his stories is validated, he'll be our biggest hero.

If he disappears, we'll go on to the next discussion.

If he proves himself a liar, then I'm sure the administrators will handle the situation accordingly.

I'd love to be humbled, and be shown the evidence that proves CY is telling the truth.

I'd love to be humbled, and be shown the evidence that proves CY is telling the truth.
[/quote]


Me too! Good post!

t.

I run into other websites all the time where the BFF is being made fun of for not believing in bigfoot. The posts went on to make fun of the forum for making fun of a witness whenever coming in to tell of a BF encounter/experience. The only reason I noticed it was because it wasn't the first time I've seen the BFF made fun of for the same reason and the posts I've seen like that go on to collect other like posts in response. I know there's at least one website where we wouldn't care a flying leap what they think or say - but that particular website isn't the only one saying it. The point I am getting to is, the BFF is getting the reputation of being the one place no one should go to, to report a BF encounter/experience. Why? Because the witness will get laughed right off the BFF forum and they go on to discuss the individuals who are doing it. I don't stick around to follow the rest of the thread because I already know what and who they're posting about anyway. I don't care what they say about the individuals who would make fun of witnesses, but I do care that they are talking down this forum and everyone in it. I don't think it's fair that the BFF is gaining somewhat of a negative reputation itself, when the reputation is caused by those who can't control their "BS Meters" or the negative way they treat witnesses who come here.

I don't know what the answer needs to be, but one thing I do know - if I have an encounter myself - I will discuss it here with people I know to be professional (not amateur) and can trust - privately. The ones who hold up the BS sign don't know the first thing about getting the information that is useful from anyone.

Haven't read that.

Fiction, non?

I will google it and see. I have a pile of crypto books from the 70s when I was a kid and right into this stuff (and my family figured it was harmless, like reading the Lord of the Rings, now they aren't so sure).

cheers

Alex

There is a write-up about it here on a thread somewhere from last year or possibly 2004. I gotthe impression it was not worth the paper. Haven't read it, though. Do a search.

You shouldn't believe everything you read.

Redwolf

I would also like to propose that many sightings are near-sleep hallucinations.
Many of them take place at night in a car, and as many of you might know, driving a car late at night, you can see some pretty weird things if you are tired.

How true! I have seen robots, giant turkeys,you name it,but as I approach it turns out to be a bush or rock or some other roadside formation. I think some people feel compelled to be involved,and a forum like this provides a certian amount of anonimity so they can be a "big shot" with out fear of being physically confronted. I am positive any one here can post up a fabricated sighting that would be very believeable and could probably hold up under intense scrutiny, might be kind of fun like the game show To tell the truth. Like my buddy who saw" something" that bothered him enough to buy several trail cams and spend more than a few nights in the woods, but he won't even mention it outside of a few close friends, just wants to avoid any attention.

On the other hand, what if the person who is giving the interview did their homework? They did some checking prior to the interview? Or from past experience and knowledge can make a informed decision if that person has been truthful in their answers? Isn't this what some call a BS meter?

Another way to look at it as if you are asking questions for a measured response. To see the reaction of the individual. Because people are not always truthful. If you are truely seeking answers would you not throw in some questions to get a response from the individual? To observe their body language and the tone of their voice.

Could the outburst you are describing not about being called a "liar" but a form of pride? That is that you are sitting there and you just can not believe someone would ask me a question like that? How dare he question me? Who does he think is? etc, etc.

Could we not apply that here too? That some of these outburst on this forum board could be a matter of pride by that individual or another because they misread a question? Or because one person has posted a story or some facts and then someone posts a question regarding it?

Is it your own knowledge and experience responding or pride? Or a sense of how dare they question that person?

Maybe we all need lessons in how to properly ask questions of each other?

Some things to ponder on.....

Or both.




Not in my case. I don't really care what someone asks, or how they ask it, as long as it isn't degrading to the witness, or accusatory without any real evidence to the contrary. This would be very mickey-mouse, unprofessional, and bozo-like in my book.

We seem to have (long ago) reached an impasse. Let's let this poor, rotted equine carcass to rest, ok? Ain't going to get much more mileage out of her that is worth a damn, anyway.

First of all- If any of you are like me, I would never be able to tell anyone about my possible encounter, they'd think I'm a wack-job. So this forum is offering a place to talk to someone about your specific encounter, without repercussions from, family and co-workers.

This leads me to believe two things, in regards to people's stories/encounters getting bashed A. There are some people who make up stuff so that they will have people to talk to. B. There are some people who react harshly because they either have the ability to see fraudulent stories, or they are reacting the way they were reacted to when they first told their story.

So... As long as their are some people making up stories, and as long as there are people making people regret telling their stories, you are going to get A. People with real stories afraid to tell of their encounters because of possible repercussions. B. People with fake stories telling them, because they like the attention.

Drew, do you know any of these people who "have the ability to see fraudulent stories"? If so, PLEASE, for the sake of all, get them to help the FBI, and local law enforcement effort. Who needs Lie Detectors?
BSF

I guess I'll start putting sarcasm explanations next to all future sarcastic statements.

My point was, we ALL think we have the ability to see fraudulant stories. I don't think science would recognize that as true or accurate. Sorry about the sarcasm, nothing personal. But, you can see it is not pleasant to be on the receiving end of it.
BSF

My point was, that there are people on here who probably do know the signs of an embellished story, they have probably seen hundreds of them. And that someone who is just trying to find someone to listen to their REAL encounter, may see the story they don't realize is fake getting tore up, and thus they would think twice about revealing their REAL encounter, because that dude that just told his story got tore up.

If you follow what I'm sayin.

Sure do, Drew, and I agree. I just had to inject that no one is 100% accurate in judging unsupported stories. Of course, some stories are just too obvious, but I still see respect as professional, disrespect as juvenile.
BSF

Not that my opinion carries a whole lot of weight around here, but personally, I couldn't care less what other boards or forums think about BFF or if they make fun of it "for not believing in bigfoot." Truth is, I suspect there are a lot of members (posters and non-posters) who don't believe bigfoot exists and even more who are in various stages of belief, or disbelief, about the subject. This isn't exactly a religious cult where you have to profess faith and undergo initiation rituals periodically to prove you are a true believer and defender of the faith! It is a discussion forum where Bigfoot and related topics can be discussed by members from all levels of belief and expertise. In the long run we are the richer for it.

I would much rather be on a forum where the hard questions (and even the inane questions) are asked and you are expected to answer them than on some of the other forums where any story that is told is swallowed whole without so much as a rinse and saying grace over it. If they make fun of us for not taking everything at face value then that is fine with me...all I want to know is why haven't they proved to all the world that bigfoot exist with their kinder, gentler, believe-it-all approach? I will gladly apologize and eat crow when they produce the evidence that gets bigfoot widely accepted in the mainstream scientific community.

If someone doesn't like the reception they get here then they are perfectly free to take their stories somewhere else where they can be uncritically accepted and feel loved. I don't know how that will help their credibility outside of that particular forum, but they are welcome to it.

Me, if I felt I had a credible case to make, I'd bring it here. If your story survives this forum then it should survive about anything anyone else will throw at you.

Let's face it, most story posters to this forum probably have a pretty damn good idea of the reception they will get here if they don't have it together, but they still keep coming.

I agree that sometimes I would like to hear more of the story told before someone calls BS (but I'm still yet to disagree with the call). That is just the nature of the beast. If you put 1 witness on the stand with 2649 potential prosecutors and defense attorneys having equal and simultaneous access to question that witness... well things are probably not going to go to suit everybody. That's just the way it is. Do the defense attorneys have the right to bitch about it, absolutely, but so do the prosecutors!


[edited to get the number of DA's and PA's right :laugh:)

Well, it's like this.....

The man boobs in BSF's avatar are killing me.

Do I detect a note of jealosy there, Mr. flowery doily with a heart?
BSF

Actually no, I love your man boobs, BSF. Feel free to sit them on my doily anytime.

That's like, sooo gay!

Why do feel I need to shower after reading the last few posts?

Plus like I am waiting for John Clease to pop out somewhere and say, "And now for something completely different..."

I wonder who whould win the drag race?

I'll ignore that.

Yeah, you're real good at ignoring people BSF, I'll have you know.

I told you before, I can't wait forever! :sad:

Uh oh, I think I scared him to death. :laugh:

LMAO!

Very good post ouachita. You put what I was feeling into words. :icon14:


BSF and Vol, you guys are too funny! :laugh:

Umm, that's "ha-ha" funny.

Um, before this gets any more strange, revisit Ouachita's post - well stated.

If I am someone who thinks he's had a bigfoot encounter - like I saw this tall, hairy, bipedal creature run across a road late at night - and I come here to post the story, I'm going to get grilled. This is entirely appropriate and necessary in a pursuit that involves regular hoaxing and general bs-ing. But what's the nature of the grilling? The questions are pretty tame, if you ask me. What was the duration of the view? What kind of habitat is in the area? Can you describe the subject's face? etc. If the answers come back that I only saw it for a second, it looked to have long muzzle, it may have dropped down on all fours, etc., then I would have to deal with the fact that some folks here might conclude that I actually saw a bear. I'm free to disagree - no harm done. And if the answers come back that the creature was well seen, at least 8 feet tall, running on 2 legs, had hands and not paws, etc, then I would expect the consensus here to be something like, "Yup, sounds like you saw a bigfoot."

But if I come here and say that for 20 years i've been regularly encountering bigfeet on my farm and that they talk to me and help my kids with their Algebra homework, then I should expect no warmer welcome here than I'd get from the Amazing Randi. Why? Because I'm a raving lunatic or just an idiot making up stories. Pointing out that these people are full of baloney also does no harm, unless we want to debate the BFF's ethical obligation to guiding the obviously mentally ill to appropriate medical treatment.