It is currently August 9th, 2020, 10:32 am

All times are UTC - 5 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 187 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11 ... 13  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: November 21st, 2011, 6:50 pm 
Offline

Joined: November 1st, 2011, 9:20 pm
Posts: 36
ChrisCanoes wrote:
mike67 wrote:
I appreciate that Barbara but it really isn't faith, it's fact.
It just comes down to a matter of time before someone can finally prove it.
http://www.bfro.net/GDB/show_report.asp?id=24733


Getting out in the woods is always a good thing and you clearly enjoy what you do. However, in no way shape or form does the bigfoot evidence that exists meet any scientific or common sense definition of "fact". I appreciate your enthusiasm for the subject, I really do, but you overstate your case. Myself and millions of others have seen strange things in the sky we can't explain but that hardly proves aliens exist.

Quite the opposite, every so called discovery that was going to undeniably prove the existence of bigfoot that has ever surfaced has been found to be a fraud, without exception. Whether it's a guy buying a monkey suit or a bunch of possum innards in a freezer, the results are always the same. Fraud. The most famous evidence by far is the Patterson film. There are not only multiple witnesses who have sworn they made the monkey suit and sold it to the filmer, but also multiple witnesses that surround the guy that was paid to wear it. They went out into the woods to get bigfoot footage for a movie they wanted to sell, and just happened to get the most famous footage of all time? I smell a rat.

PS why don't you carry and operate a sound recorder at all times during your searches? You claim to have heard multiple calls over the years but won't spend 50 bucks and capture these sounds?



I didn't state that the evidence to date confirms their existence.
I only stated that it is fact that they are a real species. I'm speaking from personal experience. No I can't prove it, yet. Maybe I never will.
It doesn't matter. Someone will, because they are in our forests and it's just a matter of time before it's realized.
I said it before, when you hear the voice of a sasquatch up close, you know there's absolutely nothing else it could be.
Tell me one animal in our forests that whoops with a guttural, human sounding tone with a massive lung capacity. The bottom end blows away any bird or other small wildlife.

As far as the "monkey suit", that's a load. Nobody could ever come up with the suit, because they lied. I would think someone who could produce a costume that even the best Hollywood makeup artists couldn't produce at that time would have shown their face by now.
They've pulled that footage apart frame by frame and to date nobody can prove it fake. It's stood the test of time and holds to this day. We're talking 1967. Have you seen the muscle definition, hernia, gait etc?

Most of society knows only what the media portrays. They don't take the time to gather the whole picture and evidence that is continually building up year after year.

I suppose Russian Scientists and their claim that the Yeti is real is a joke?
Maybe if it was U.S or Canadian Scientists then it might sway some people differently?

I do carry an audio recorder after my second vocal incident.
I've purchased trail cams, audio recorder, have quality photo gear, binoculars, I carry it all.
An incident or encounter doesn't happen all the time. Incidents are far a few between. I put in hundreds of field hours in the last several years searching for evidence.
It just doesn't come that easy.

Oh, the idiots with the freezer are just that, idiots. It's people like that who make it difficult for the truth to come out.

_________________
 


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: November 21st, 2011, 7:42 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: December 30th, 2003, 11:36 pm
Posts: 1807
Location: Kitchener Ontario
Quote:
As far as the "monkey suit", that's a load. Nobody could ever come up with the suit, because they lied. I would think someone who could produce a costume that even the best Hollywood makeup artists couldn't produce at that time would have shown their face by now.
They've pulled that footage apart frame by frame and to date nobody can prove it fake. It's stood the test of time and holds to this day. We're talking 1967. Have you seen the muscle definition, hernia, gait etc?


Gotta say I'm with you on this one....

_________________
Dave

"The way of a canoe is the way of the wilderness, and of a freedom almost forgotten." Sigurd Olson, 1956


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: November 22nd, 2011, 10:01 am 
Offline

Joined: March 19th, 2010, 2:02 pm
Posts: 51
So you've heard something you can't explain. I'll give you that. But how do you know it's a giant ape that you've never seen but heard secondhand information about from someone else? No other possible cause? See where I'm going? Some people swear they've been abducted (and maybe they have), but until their is real evidence of aliens, I'm tempted to ascribe the things I've seen in the sky to more mundane causes.

As far as the suit, it's well known that Philip Morris, the owner of a prop and costume making company for over 40 years, made the suit and sold it to Patterson in 1967. It was made of a synthetic fur material called Dynel and cost $450. From Wikipedia:

Quote:
As for the creature's walk, Morris said:

The Bigfoot researchers say that no human can walk that way in the film. Oh, yes they can! When you're wearing long clown's feet, you can't place the ball of your foot down first. You have to put your foot down flat. Otherwise, you'll stumble. Another thing, when you put on the gorilla head, you can only turn your head maybe a quarter of the way. And to look behind you, you've got to turn your head and your shoulders and your hips. Plus, the shoulder pads in the suit are in the way of the jaw. That's why the Bigfoot turns and looks the way he does in the film. He has to twist his entire upper body.



Who should we believe? On one side, an honest business man and his wife, a guy who said he wore the suit and a bunch of witnesses that saw it in his car and on him, and another business owner that Patterson confided in that he was making fake footprints; on the other side Patterson, a known con man desperate for money.

http://xzonenation.blogspot.com/2006/11/exposing-roger-pattersons-1967-bigfoot.html

No doubt this won't change your mind a bit, enjoy your quest :thumbup:


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: November 22nd, 2011, 9:37 pm 
Offline

Joined: November 1st, 2011, 9:20 pm
Posts: 36
Patterson did such an impressive job manipulating Morris's costume that he should have been working for Hollywood. Surely he'd be a mentor considering his achievement.

I'd like all those people who claimed it was a fake to give a lie detector.
Their statements mean nothing just as the 10's of thousands that have had sightings that are supposedly misidentification or lies.
The difference being that the 10's of thousands don't know each other which is not the same as Patterson's situation.

There's more to the story at that time.
There was a man named Tom Slick who was funding Patterson and others to gather evidence of this creature.
Rene Dahinden and John Green were also involved at the time.
There was logging going on at the time in Bluff Creek and at one point there was heavy machinery tossed around like they were toys.
Also at one point John Green and Rene Dahinden got a call when some fresh prints had been found around the construction area.
Green and Dahinden flew to the location right away while the prints were still fresh.
They counted 1089 prints that day, some still fresh with dermal ridges.

Sorry but I can't see them figuring out the science behind the prints and placing so many overnight.
There's more evidence pointing towards a real creature than there is a con mans antics.

The muscle definition and hernia shown in the film (I'll leave gait out this time) are real. Way too good to be a hoax.

It's funny how Philip Morris's Bigfoot costumes still aren't as good as it would have been over 40 years ago. You'd think he'd have it down by now.

There could be alot of animosity and jealously because of Patterson's success. People do funny things when it comes to this.

I'm extremely aware of my own personal experiences and after hearing whoops from a very close range, I know exactly what I've experienced.

We can debate back and forth and it'll never solve anything.
The only way to find out is to go find out for yourself.
Educating yourself on how to maximize your potential for an encounter might very well give you the experience of a lifetime.
Understand what to look for, listen for and how to attract them.

Personally, after the first experience I was hooked.
It's an experience unlike anything else you could ever achieve.
I'm 3 years in at this point and not giving up anytime soon.
An incredible species that defy conventional logic. They have adapted to the point of myth.
Knowing there's a handful out there with the same situation as my own,
I believe it's just a matter of time before the truth is revealed.

_________________
 


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: November 23rd, 2011, 1:02 am 
Offline

Joined: March 19th, 2002, 7:00 pm
Posts: 513
Location: Mt Brydges, Ontario Canada
There was a show on OLN on Tuesday, I think it was called Monsterquest. They talked about the Patterson film and came to the conclusion it was genuine. They had an expert take digital pictures of every image on the original. Although it was still pretty grainy, they were able to bring out facial details such as how the cheek muscles, eye lids and mouth moved in each still. They said no technology could have done that 45 years ago, and 45 years ago they probably never would have faked it as good, as they would never guessed just how advanced digital technology would be in the future.

Also in the episode there were 2 different parties around the Mt. St. Helens area. They set up cameras and baited various spots and left the cameras for 30 days, the only things they had pictures of were elk.

_________________
The idea of wilderness needs no defense.
It only needs more defenders.

Edward Abbey


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: November 23rd, 2011, 9:18 am 
Offline

Joined: August 26th, 2003, 2:07 pm
Posts: 941
I once encountered a Purple Elephant while on a portage in Temagami.

Sure, I didn't actually see this Purple Elephant, but I did hear a sound that I didn't recognize, and I assume this sound was the call that is only made by Purple Elephants, so therefore, it only stands to reason that a small population of Purple Elephants exists in the Temagami Wilderness.

...

When it's explained this way, it sounds ridiculous, doesn't it?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: November 23rd, 2011, 10:20 am 
Offline

Joined: March 19th, 2010, 2:02 pm
Posts: 51
mike67 wrote:
Patterson did such an impressive job manipulating Morris's costume that he should have been working for Hollywood. Surely he'd be a mentor considering his achievement.


People who don't have a foregone conclusion in their head see the film for what it is: a grainy, distant, inconclusive film shot by a known con man who was out to "capture footage of bigfoot". The analysis I've seen points to a definite fraud. For instance, can you explain to me why this costume I mean apeman has no toes?

http://www.bigfootmustdie.com/patterson-bigfoot-film-fake.html

Quote:
The muscle definition and hernia shown in the film (I'll leave gait out this time) are real. Way too good to be a hoax.


The obvious zipper line up the back and the padded toeless feet are impressive too :rofl: . But the very best part is the glint of sunlight off "bigfoot's" eye in frame 352. Human eyes don't reflect light in that way. An early analyzer of the film saw this bright reflection and was stumped what it could be. Turns out, the guy that wore the suit has a glass eye on that side! The film analyzer had no knowledge of this at the time. 'Splain that one?

Quote:
It's funny how Philip Morris's Bigfoot costumes still aren't as good as it would have been over 40 years ago. You'd think he'd have it down by now.


It's funny that you diss a guy who is known to be nothing but honest and support a known conman. Morris is one of if not the biggest suppliers of costumes to Hollywood. Bob Hope, Johnny Cash, Batman (Michael Keaton), David Copperfield, Elvira, Lois Lane, Johnny Carson, maybe you've heard of a few of his clients?

Quote:
There could be alot of animosity and jealously because of Patterson's success. People do funny things when it comes to this.


Or most impartial people can see that it's just a little too convenient that this guy went out to film bigfoot and just so happened to do just that?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: November 23rd, 2011, 6:21 pm 
Offline

Joined: November 1st, 2011, 9:20 pm
Posts: 36
Mike McIntosh wrote:
I once encountered a Purple Elephant while on a portage in Temagami.

Sure, I didn't actually see this Purple Elephant, but I did hear a sound that I didn't recognize, and I assume this sound was the call that is only made by Purple Elephants, so therefore, it only stands to reason that a small population of Purple Elephants exists in the Temagami Wilderness.

...

When it's explained this way, it sounds ridiculous, doesn't it?


When you're talk'n purple Elephants and there's been not one sighting in all of history that I'm aware of, yes it does sound ridiculous.

_________________
 


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: November 23rd, 2011, 6:53 pm 
Offline

Joined: November 1st, 2011, 9:20 pm
Posts: 36
ChrisCanoes wrote:
mike67 wrote:
Patterson did such an impressive job manipulating Morris's costume that he should have been working for Hollywood. Surely he'd be a mentor considering his achievement.


People who don't have a foregone conclusion in their head see the film for what it is: a grainy, distant, inconclusive film shot by a known con man who was out to "capture footage of bigfoot". The analysis I've seen points to a definite fraud. For instance, can you explain to me why this costume I mean apeman has no toes?

http://www.bigfootmustdie.com/patterson-bigfoot-film-fake.html

Quote:
The muscle definition and hernia shown in the film (I'll leave gait out this time) are real. Way too good to be a hoax.


The obvious zipper line up the back and the padded toeless feet are impressive too :rofl: . But the very best part is the glint of sunlight off "bigfoot's" eye in frame 352. Human eyes don't reflect light in that way. An early analyzer of the film saw this bright reflection and was stumped what it could be. Turns out, the guy that wore the suit has a glass eye on that side! The film analyzer had no knowledge of this at the time. 'Splain that one?

Quote:
It's funny how Philip Morris's Bigfoot costumes still aren't as good as it would have been over 40 years ago. You'd think he'd have it down by now.


It's funny that you diss a guy who is known to be nothing but honest and support a known conman. Morris is one of if not the biggest suppliers of costumes to Hollywood. Bob Hope, Johnny Cash, Batman (Michael Keaton), David Copperfield, Elvira, Lois Lane, Johnny Carson, maybe you've heard of a few of his clients?

Quote:
There could be alot of animosity and jealously because of Patterson's success. People do funny things when it comes to this.


Or most impartial people can see that it's just a little too convenient that this guy went out to film bigfoot and just so happened to do just that?


It's a pointless debate. Until someone captures the holy grail of footage or brings in a body, it'll always be this way.
I was very skeptical when shown an area where a 20" print had been found.
If I didn't experience a life changing event that day, I wouldn't be wasting my time.
I did though, and the question has been answered for me.

There are many elusive species that evade our detection.
It wasn't too long ago that over 100,000 Lowland Gorillas were discovered that we didn't know were there.
That's a big number to miss.
The Mountain Gorilla was once a myth just like the Sasquatch.

We're dealing with something that is intelligent and elusive to the extreme.
Most can keep their heads in the sand all they want, it doesn't change that we're dealing with an intelligent elusive primate.
Sightings are documented from several hundred years back.

Were they hoaxing then too? No, I don't think so.

As far as a zipper on the "suit", it's funny that you can see it but most can't. If it was that obvious I'm sure the scientists would be all over that.
Patterson didn't have the brains to pull off a stunt that would stand up to todays technology.

The world of Bigfoot is full of animosity and jealousy.

That grainy distant inconclusive film has stood up to todays technology so your statement is just ridiculous. I could understand if it was scrutinize and science could prove it fake, but they can't.
I'll reiterate. We're talking 1967 here. You're telling me that a conman and his cronies could make a suit better than the best of Hollywood makeup artists at that time? That is just ridiculous.
There's so much hearsay surrounding that film with people claiming this and claiming that with absolutely no backup except someone else's b.s.
At least Patterson has a piece of film to back up his claim.

As far as the toes go, being such a grainy distant inconclusive film, do you expect to see the toes defined? Do you want them splayed so you can see them better?
They're not the same as our feet. They're built different obviously because of the weight distribution.

As far as Morris is concerned. His "costume" in 1967 looks much better than what he could make today.

The people, and there's 10's if not 100's of thousands who have had experiences know. Organizations like the BFRO and others know. Independents like myself know. The rest don't have a clue.
They listen to the media b.s. and assume that's the truth.

The truth will reveal itself in time.
In the meantime I'll continue my quest for the holy grail :lol:

_________________
 


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: November 23rd, 2011, 8:58 pm 
Offline

Joined: November 11th, 2011, 4:02 pm
Posts: 5
Next year should be the year, were really close. So will the average working Joe believe the scientists or tabloid media reporting this time around?

JMO, T :)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: November 24th, 2011, 5:35 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: April 21st, 2004, 10:52 am
Posts: 1128
Location: Near Ottawa ON
Quote:
The processes of motivated reasoning are a type of inferred justification strategy which is used to mitigate cognitive dissonance. When people form and cling to false beliefs despite overwhelming evidence, the phenomenon is labeled "motivated reasoning". In other words, "rather than search rationally for information that either confirms or disconfirms a particular belief, people actually seek out information that confirms what they already believe."[2] This is "a form of implicit emotion regulation in which the brain converges on judgments that minimize negative and maximize positive affect states associated with threat to or attainment of motives."[3]


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motivated_reasoning


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: November 24th, 2011, 6:43 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: August 27th, 2002, 7:00 pm
Posts: 2555
Location: Geraldton, Ontario Can
I'm glad you found the word for it Krusty, so many people I know are exhibiting this behaviour with conspiracy theories. They demand that everyone be open minded to their belief, but if you put a reasonable alternative explanation in front of them, they call you narrow minded, and don't seem to see the irony of the label. I blame the internet, where people can easily dismiss contrary points of views and always find supportive views, even if they are coming from a 12 year old kid masquerading as an expert.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: November 24th, 2011, 6:48 pm 
Offline

Joined: November 1st, 2011, 9:20 pm
Posts: 36
Krusty wrote:
Quote:
The processes of motivated reasoning are a type of inferred justification strategy which is used to mitigate cognitive dissonance. When people form and cling to false beliefs despite overwhelming evidence, the phenomenon is labeled "motivated reasoning". In other words, "rather than search rationally for information that either confirms or disconfirms a particular belief, people actually seek out information that confirms what they already believe."[2] This is "a form of implicit emotion regulation in which the brain converges on judgments that minimize negative and maximize positive affect states associated with threat to or attainment of motives."[3]


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motivated_reasoning


What are you trying to say? :rofl:

All kidding aside, you guys are in for the shock of your life when the truth is finally revealed.
I wouldn't be putting myself out there looking like a fool if I didn't know the truth.
I'm not a betting man but in this case, I'd lay it all on the line.

What does it take to have science take a serious look at the situation here?
Reports documented for hundreds of years.
10's of thousands of sightings worldwide.
We have the Chinese Yeren, the Australian Yowie, Indonesian Orang Pendek, North American Bigfoot or Sasquatch, Himalayan Yeti plus others.
Sightings from very credible witnesses time and time again.
Footprints with dermal ridges etc.

Do any of you know the story of Ron Morehead and Alan Barry?
They recorded a group of Sasquatch between 1971 to 76 and those recordings have also stood the test of time.
They have the best recorded vocalizations to date.

The voice I heard would be along the lines of the "Old Man" in the Morehead recordings.
Most likely the dominant male.

As mentioned before, there are others out there like myself who have their research areas of ongoing activity, trying like myself to gather evidence and hopefully one day have something that is undeniable.

Most of you don't have a clue what's really going on, that includes science.
Science is theory and is proven wrong time and time again.
This will be another one of those times.

Didn't we just find out that there is something faster than the speed of light? Hmm. Science proven wrong once again.

_________________
 


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: November 25th, 2011, 7:52 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: April 21st, 2004, 10:52 am
Posts: 1128
Location: Near Ottawa ON
Hey Mike, you'll note the catch-22 with the "motivated reasoning" thing - it's a fact that people do this, but the fact that I might be doing it threatens my belief so it must be that it doesn't apply to me because <insert motivated reasoning here> and everything is all good again. :D

WRT disproving the existance of sasquatch, could you please, when you find one, prove that the magic Flying Purple Spaghetti Monster isn't somehow involved? :D

I won't waste your time debating sasquatch, but I will go off topic (although it perhaps has some relevance) to address the following:
Quote:
Didn't we just find out that there is something faster than the speed of light?
No. We found that a particular experiment does not give results predicted by current theory. And they can't find a flaw with the experiment. But results have not been duplicated by others.

Quote:
Hmm. Science proven wrong once again.

No, it's the scientific method proven right once again. Here's what the people that are doing those experiments say:

Quote:
...the observed anomaly in the neutrinos' time of flight from CERN to Gran Sasso still needs further scrutiny and independent measurement before it can be refuted or confirmed....
The OPERA measurement is at odds with well-established laws of nature, though science frequently progresses by overthrowing the established paradigms. For this reason, many searches have been made for deviations from Einstein’s theory of relativity, so far not finding any such evidence. The strong constraints arising from these observations makes an interpretation of the OPERA measurement in terms of modification of Einstein’s theory unlikely, and give further strong reason to seek new independent measurements.
http://press.web.cern.ch/press/PressRel ... 9.11E.html


BTW, this blogger has the same name, phrasing and examples as you? http://40waystofindasasquatch.blogspot.com/


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: November 25th, 2011, 9:28 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: August 27th, 2002, 7:00 pm
Posts: 2555
Location: Geraldton, Ontario Can
Mike, I'm open to a lot of things, and wouldn't dismiss the possibility of a sasquatch. Although I can't confirm their existence, I can confirm that you support my theory about internet specialists, in that you can't contain yourself from dismissing those contrary to your opinion.
Quote:
Most of you don't have a clue what's really going on, that includes science.


I have taken my jabs at science in the past as well, but usually because i was trying to "poke the hornet's nest". There is room in life for divergent opinions, without resorting to essentially calling us stupid. After all, despite your claims, all you really have is an opinion, no need to classify the rest of us according to your opinion.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 187 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11 ... 13  Next

All times are UTC - 5 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group