How many forum members believe in Bigfoot

[+OverSword]

13 minutes ago, Piney said:

I have 2/3s of a tribe of true believers. I actually used him a a "false memory/ thought form" to give this AIM twit grief and cause her nightmares. 

@the13bats  They think I'm covering for him. 

What’s AIM?

[Piney]

1 minute ago, OverSword said:

What’s AIM?

The Native version of the IRA but with empty threats instead of bombs and shootings. 

[Piney]

6 minutes ago, OverSword said:

I respect pineys opinion about it. He doesn’t believe in it after years of searching and also believes I was probably mistaken about what I saw and leaves it at that. He doesn’t go nuts and put words in my mouth concerning other posters.

There's no sense arguing about something that can neither be proven or disproven.  

 

[Commander CMG]

8 minutes ago, Piney said:

The Native version of the IRA but with empty threats instead of bombs and shootings. 

One of my first contracts in the private sector.... Russell Means?? 

[Piney]

37 minutes ago, Iilaa'mpuul'xem said:

One of my first contracts in the private sector.... Russell Means?? 

The chauvinistic, wife beating drunk who use to smack around his elderly father-in-law? 

He was until he was found by Hollywood and Disney. 

Edited July 9, 2019 by Piney

[Commander CMG]

6 minutes ago, Piney said:

The chauvinistic, wife beating drunk who use to smack around his elderly father-in-law? 

He was until he was found by Hollywood and Disney. 

Yep... Thats the individual.. I think he was second in command of the AIM when I took the contract.

I don't think I have even been on a plane with so many IRA members when I flew across the pond... now that was worrying. The AIM were in bed big time with the IRA.

I have told you this story before when we were in the woodlands.  

[the13bats]

1 hour ago, OverSword said:

I respect pineys opinion about it. He doesn’t believe in it after years of searching and also believes I was probably mistaken about what I saw and leaves it at that. He doesn’t go nuts and put words in my mouth concerning other posters.

i havent put words in anyones mouth, nor have i gone nuts, im actually pretty mellow  rare for my racy mind.

its a public forum for open discussion, i cant help that my bed side manors doesnt suit you as well as some im just not great at coddling i know how it feels to have what you say manipulated, i get labelled a skeptic thats fine but from what i see from some that i consider skeptics im not one, i seldom call people liars or delusional or mentally ill, althought some true belivers are some or all of that, only when they go ad hominem do i give it back, which i dont like doing at all.

you tossed your case out here all you have is a story which i believe i believe you saw a track, i believe you are convinced with zero chance of entertaining other opinions it was bigfoot and i even respect that even though it really goes against so much for me to grasp anyone can base belief on one small piece of weak evidence, i can both respect your story and beliefs and still not agree with them or consider them facts as you do, i find this acceptable i cant help it if you do not.

 

1 hour ago, Piney said:

I have 2/3s of a tribe of true believers. I actually used him as a "false memory/ thought form" to give this AIM twit grief and cause her nightmares. 

@the13bats  They think I'm covering for him. 

makes me think of the mind control scene from dinner for schmucks,  but i get it, and weak minds are easy to mess with takes that type person to buy into thought forms etc i saw the whole power of suggestion, belief really mess a guy up many years back so i wont play people with it , but i guess if someones being a twit give them all you got.

1 hour ago, Iilaa'mpuul'xem said:

Ohhh you don't upset me, you make me smile. I don't think anyone has deeply upset me...  maybe, my ex-wife that took me to the cleaners but that's about it. 

the way you went at me and what you said gave me the impression you were very upset, i I much rather imagine you were smiling and not all messed upset.

ill just slide out, while not as strick i feel the same as xeno about it, and keep in mind in my case just because i dont think it will happen i would love to see proof of bigfoot, really who wouldnt?

 

 

[Piney]

13 minutes ago, Iilaa'mpuul'xem said:

I don't think I have even been on a plane with so many IRA members when I flew across the pond... now that was worrying. The AIM were in bed big time with the IRA.

 

AIM was in bed with the Sandinistas too. 

You told me the story several times! 

[+OverSword]

2 minutes ago, the13bats said:

i believe you are convinced with zero chance of entertaining other opinions it was bigfoot

Don't know for a fact that it was a sasquatch as you can't know for a fact that they exist but while we are walking around examining the tracks certain things were eliminated by a professional trained as both a crime scene investigator and as a lifelong hunter familiar with this specific environment.  Wasn't a bear or any other animal on all fours.  That kind of eliminates everything but a human or "something else"    One clear foot print about 22 inches long with a heel and toes.  We were just kind of stuck "dang, that there's a bigfoot track"  So you're wrong about zero chance of entertaining other opinions.  It's just that we had those opinions and they were marked off at the scene.

[the13bats]

32 minutes ago, OverSword said:

Don't know for a fact that it was a sasquatch as you can't know for a fact that they exist but while we are walking around examining the tracks certain things were eliminated by a professional trained as both a crime scene investigator and as a lifelong hunter familiar with this specific environment.  Wasn't a bear or any other animal on all fours.  That kind of eliminates everything but a human or "something else"    One clear foot print about 22 inches long with a heel and toes.  We were just kind of stuck "dang, that there's a bigfoot track"  So you're wrong about zero chance of entertaining other opinions.  It's just that we had those opinions and they were marked off at the scene.

no one knows as a fact bigfoot exists hense why we are here and you are trying to convince others it does exist based solely on one track you saw, yes the way you present it you pigeon hole it can only be bigfoot so thats pushing your belief as the only option ie bigfoot exists.

i thought i would move on but im feeling poorly so this is great procrastination from chores,

i have stated it over and over but will again,

im not dissing your expert in hunting and csi work however im pointing out with example humans even professionals can and do make mistakes and are sometimes wrong,

jimmy chilcutt was according to what he says is a lifelong expert not only with human prints but primate prints, he based his reputation his dermal ridge finding were insidputable proof of bigfoot then  Esteban Sarmiento and a artist i cant recall his name and others showed flaws to the extent of chilcut being wrong, his thinking in one case brush marks were ridges.

krantz fell for a faked print of his students, and i do not mean to insult but i will accept that if krantz and chilcut can be wrong anyone can be including your expert.

you said there was one good print the rest were gouge marks and all due respects none of the members of your team were bear experts  or experts in how footprints can change and morph.

to be very clear im not saying its a bear end of story like you have been saying until now it was bigfoot end of story, but you still back pedal thats all it could be,

 i am very correct you refuse to entertain other options other options than its bigfoot for any case like this possiblities must stay open or its just biased and worthless except of course to the true believer,

im simply saying your case is far from proof and is not even good evidence to support the belief in bigfoot, but as i have also said before i respect its proof enough for you.

so we are on the same side.

[+OverSword]

16 minutes ago, the13bats said:

no one knows as a fact bigfoot exists hense why we are here and you are trying to convince others it does exist based solely on one track you saw, yes the way you present it you pigeon hole it can only be bigfoot so thats pushing your belief as the only option ie bigfoot exists.

i thought i would move on but im feeling poorly so this is great procrastination from chores,

i have stated it over and over but will again,

im not dissing your expert in hunting and csi work however im pointing out with example humans even professionals can and do make mistakes and are sometimes wrong,

jimmy chilcutt was according to what he says is a lifelong expert not only with human prints but primate prints, he based his reputation his dermal ridge finding were insidputable proof of bigfoot then  Esteban Sarmiento and a artist i cant recall his name and others showed flaws to the extent of chilcut being wrong, his thinking in one case brush marks were ridges.

krantz fell for a faked print of his students, and i do not mean to insult but i will accept that if krantz and chilcut can be wrong anyone can be including your expert.

you said there was one good print the rest were gouge marks and all due respects none of the members of your team were bear experts  or experts in how footprints can change and morph.

to be very clear im not saying its a bear end of story like you have been saying until now it was bigfoot end of story, but you still back pedal thats all it could be,

 i am very correct you refuse to entertain other options other options than its bigfoot for any case like this possiblities must stay open or its just biased and worthless except of course to the true believer,

im simply saying your case is far from proof and is not even good evidence to support the belief in bigfoot, but as i have also said before i respect its proof enough for you.

so we are on the same side.

I have no clue about your references as it seems you are much more into this subject than I am.  Too bad you weren't the one that saw what I saw seems like it would have meant more to you than to me.  It wasn't a bear.  It was really clear and fresh, no more than a day and in deep shade so there weren't too many forces that could have deformed it like mud drying, crumbling stretching, no rain, nothing.  It was a classic clear as the nose on your face, big foot print like we've all seen plaster casted on TV.  It wasn't a hoax.  It just was what it was.  anomalous, surely but still it was just in your face reality if you were there.  That's my memory.  Don't believe it.

[Stardrive]

5 hours ago, Merc14 said:

Why?  HE used tools, BF doesn't; HE likely used fire, BF doesn't; HE had a rudimentary language and communicated with it, BF doesn't.  There is literally nothing comparable between the two on the evolutionary scale.

Rudimentary tool use, no compound tools. Fire use I'm not sure. Homo erectus knew about fire but still preferred their meat on the raw side. They had a problem with intestinal worms because of it. But anyway, even the great apes use tools and I don't know for a fact if this thing you're calling Bigfoot uses tools or not.

[the13bats]

17 minutes ago, OverSword said:

I have no clue about your references as it seems you are much more into this subject than I am.  Too bad you weren't the one that saw what I saw seems like it would have meant more to you than to me.  It wasn't a bear.  It was really clear and fresh, no more than a day and in deep shade so there weren't too many forces that could have deformed it like mud drying, crumbling stretching, no rain, nothing.  It was a classic clear as the nose on your face, big foot print like we've all seen plaster casted on TV.  It wasn't a hoax.  It just was what it was.  anomalous, surely but still it was just in your face reality if you were there.  That's my memory.  Don't believe it.

again i believe you i just dont think the track was bigfoot or proof of bigfoot, because of how much i have researched this subject, belief wont float i need proof.

how do i reply without sounding pompous but i am or was very much into the subject and have in 40 plus years done a lot of research because i am drawn party due to my intense OCD ADD to a mystery, but when i got on the net things really opened up across the bored about 95% of what i believed was in the trash can it really sucked,

sure, i wish i had seen your print or a pic or a cast but you and i think very differently, where i very well might have had my mind engage and jump to bigfoot that moment would be short lived, and far from the end of the story close the book as you have done, ive seen too many experts be dead wrong,

however, prints are that final hurdle for me it is hard for me to dismiss them all then the reality sets in the balance of a few unexplaned footprints vs the insurmountable evidence that doesnt support a creature like bf could exist or if it did we would have had proof long before now,

i actually dont blame some true believers who think bf is an alien pet, interdiamential, or some other eccentric entity, after all there is no other good way to cling to bigfoot exists but answer why we have zero to prove it, if it existed we should have proof.

 

 

[Carnoferox]

57 minutes ago, Stardrive said:

Rudimentary tool use, no compound tools. Fire use I'm not sure. Homo erectus knew about fire but still preferred their meat on the raw side. They had a problem with intestinal worms because of it. But anyway, even the great apes use tools and I don't know for a fact if this thing you're calling Bigfoot uses tools or not.

There's zero fossil/artifact records of Homo erectus in North America, despite being well-known throughout Africa and Eurasia. H. erectus is also not within the size range usually reported for Bigfoot sightings. As I've said many times before, there is no ape in the fossil record that is accurately comparable to Bigfoot.

[Piney]

1 hour ago, Stardrive said:

Rudimentary tool use, no compound tools. Fire use I'm not sure. Homo erectus knew about fire but still preferred their meat on the raw side. They had a problem with intestinal worms because of it. But anyway, even the great apes use tools and I don't know for a fact if this thing you're calling Bigfoot uses tools or not.

I would like to see a source on the 'intestinal worm" idea. 

Homo Erectus was pretty well advanced. Some archaeologists think they might of even used rafts in Asia. Also many "Homo Erectus" material in Asia is actually proving to be Denisovan.

[Piney]

52 minutes ago, Carnoferox said:

As I've said many times before, there is no ape in the fossil record that is accurately comparable to Bigfoot.

*Looks shifty eyed in both directions*

*Looks up*

Gigantopithecus ? 

[Carnoferox]

14 minutes ago, Piney said:

*Looks shifty eyed in both directions*

*Looks up*

Gigantopithecus ? 

Of course, Gigantopithecus, the giant bipedal hominin from North America!

[Piney]

2 minutes ago, Carnoferox said:

Of course, Gigantopithecus, the giant bipedal hominin from North America!

Being a "shovel jockey" for those 2 museums was what finally convinced me there is no Bigfoot. I started reading up while with the Smithsonian's Museum of New York and thought "Well, the Robust Australopithecines couldn't of made such a jump in height". Then Luzonensis and Floresiensis showed they actually downsized when they moved to Asia. 

[the13bats]

46 minutes ago, Piney said:

*Looks shifty eyed in both directions*

*Looks up*

Gigantopithecus ? 

thank you doc krantz ( rip ) and your lemming meldrum

Edited July 10, 2019 by the13bats

[Piney]

6 minutes ago, the13bats said:

thank you doc krantz ( rip ) and your lemming meldrum

[onlookerofmayhem]

@OverSword

Any chance that the hunter/outdoorsman guy could have faked the print to mess around?

From your description of his knowledge, it seems he would be capable of doing so.

Thanks in advance. 

[Grim Reaper 6]

2 hours ago, Carnoferox said:

There's zero fossil/artifact records of Homo erectus in North America, despite being well-known throughout Africa and Eurasia. H. erectus is also not within the size range usually reported for Bigfoot sightings. As I've said many times before, there is no ape in the fossil record that is accurately comparable to Bigfoot.

I could not agree with you more, from all known scientific research on the subject the first migrations into the Americas were made by Homo Sapiens. Sometime between 12000, and 25000 years ago, exact dates may vary, by this time period Homo Erectus no longer existed.

[Stardrive]

2 hours ago, Carnoferox said:

There's zero fossil/artifact records of Homo erectus in North America, despite being well-known throughout Africa and Eurasia. H. erectus is also not within the size range usually reported for Bigfoot sightings. As I've said many times before, there is no ape in the fossil record that is accurately comparable to Bigfoot.

That is all true to the best of our knoledge. If the bigfoot was real I would say its a very large species of Australopithacine. And that's a big if.

[Carnoferox]

1 minute ago, Stardrive said:

That is all true to the best of our knoledge. If the bigfoot was real I would say its a very large species of Australopithacine. And that's a big if.

An aberrant species of Homo would be the closest match for Bigfoot in my opinion, but again it's difficult to fit it in with real apes. 

[Stardrive]

2 hours ago, Piney said:

I would like to see a source on the 'intestinal worm" idea. 

Homo Erectus was pretty well advanced. Some archaeologists think they might of even used rafts in Asia. Also many "Homo Erectus" material in Asia is actually proving to be Denisovan.

Go to youtube and watch  stories from the stone age. I guess It's possible the prducers made it up. Researching ........