ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » General Skepticism and The Paranormal
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Tags bigfoot , bigfoot sightings , NAWAC

Reply
Old 17th April 2017, 01:43 PM   #3161
William Parcher
Show me the monkey!
 
William Parcher's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 16,287
It is very simple to kill a primate that is throwing rocks at a cabin at night. You could do it on your first try.

This isn't done because the guys with guns at the cabin know that the thrower is human. They know it's a pretend thing and they are not naive or credulous. There will never be a kill shot because they know it's a person and not a Bigfoot.

They are complicit in hoaxing and are therefore hoaxers themselves.
__________________
Bigfoot believers and Bigfoot skeptics are both plumb crazy. Each spends more than one minute per year thinking about Bigfoot.
William Parcher is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th April 2017, 05:46 PM   #3162
HarryHenderson
Graduate Poster
 
HarryHenderson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: All up in your business!
Posts: 1,474
Originally Posted by Resume View Post
When are the wood ape people gonna show us a wood ape?...
Apparently they think Dorothy and Scarecrow can't figure out their uncanny ability to produce a Wood Ape™ on demand relates only to the medium, not the reality. If it's a story in words on the page, POOF there's a Wood Ape™. When a picture is needed, the camera batteries died. There's a reason they continue to act is if they're long past any "establishment of a new species phase" and now knee deep in "conservation" of such.

The real truth is you gotta be a pretty disturbed person to not only insist but base your life around the notion you're seeing/feeling/hearing/experiencing an unknown species of hairy beast that's genuinely not there and you know that it's not there. Maybe even more so if you're able to convince other individuals to share in the same delusion.
HarryHenderson is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th April 2017, 07:02 PM   #3163
jerrywayne
Muse
 
jerrywayne's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 908
Originally Posted by William Parcher View Post
It is very simple to kill a primate that is throwing rocks at a cabin at night. You could do it on your first try.

This isn't done because the guys with guns at the cabin know that the thrower is human. They know it's a pretend thing and they are not naive or credulous. There will never be a kill shot because they know it's a person and not a Bigfoot.

They are complicit in hoaxing and are therefore hoaxers themselves.
We know that Brown has said they found a indention on the ground outlining a person in a prone sniper position. This was found on top of the hill overlooking the cabin. He also said team members were scouting that very area later at dusk and his flashlight picked up two large, perfectly round eyes reflecting red in the brush, and they just oddly fell away downward. Both these events virtually cry out for a human/hoaxer interpretation: a spy once in a prone position keeping a lookout over the cabin; later a spy dropping his binoculars or night glasses after having a flashlight aimed in his direction. Of course, NAWAC in their zeal refuse to even consider these events human related; they dismiss them as ape manifestations.

NAWAC was brought to this very spot, a steep, tall hillside overlooking the cabin for the very reason that it would be impossible to catch a hoaxer in the act. At night, NAWAC members wouldn't be careless enough to just blast away up into the hill, to be on the safe side. We can assume the hoaxers are not flying blind in the night. The above examples suggest they are armed with night vision glasses.

WP, the interpretation you and I have as to what is going on here reflects our basic disagreement: you virtually absent the role of belief, an irrational and religious like belief, in your explanation while I see belief's role as paramount to understanding the phenomena at Area X, as elsewhere in Bigfootville.
jerrywayne is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th April 2017, 04:40 AM   #3164
Garrette
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 14,484
Originally Posted by jerrywayne View Post
We know that Brown has said they found a indention on the ground outlining a person in a prone sniper position. This was found on top of the hill overlooking the cabin. He also said team members were scouting that very area later at dusk and his flashlight picked up two large, perfectly round eyes reflecting red in the brush, and they just oddly fell away downward. Both these events virtually cry out for a human/hoaxer interpretation: a spy once in a prone position keeping a lookout over the cabin; later a spy dropping his binoculars or night glasses after having a flashlight aimed in his direction. Of course, NAWAC in their zeal refuse to even consider these events human related; they dismiss them as ape manifestations.

NAWAC was brought to this very spot, a steep, tall hillside overlooking the cabin for the very reason that it would be impossible to catch a hoaxer in the act. At night, NAWAC members wouldn't be careless enough to just blast away up into the hill, to be on the safe side. We can assume the hoaxers are not flying blind in the night. The above examples suggest they are armed with night vision glasses.

WP, the interpretation you and I have as to what is going on here reflects our basic disagreement: you virtually absent the role of belief, an irrational and religious like belief, in your explanation while I see belief's role as paramount to understanding the phenomena at Area X, as elsewhere in Bigfootville.
1st highlighted section: Nonsense (their description; not necessarily your retelling of it). This is precisely the kind of detail that indicates a wannabe tough guy making something up. Go lie down in whatever you consider to be a "prone sniper position." Right next to it lie down in whatever you consider be a prone non-sniper position. Then get up and compare them. Then get some people who weren't there and tell them to find the two areas in which you lay down and then tell you which is sniper and which is non-sniper.

2nd highlighted section: Not quite as nonsensical but still tending toward it. What most people will call dusk is civil nautical twilight at which point someone with a night vision device will likely not yet be using them, but let's be generous and assume they meant astronomical twilight when someone might actually be using night vision devices. First, they wouldn't be using them if they saw someone with a flashlight nearby. Second, the people with the flashlight would not see red when the flashlight shone on the night vision device; the intense white light would completely wash out any near infrared or far infrared light being emitted by the device. If they were to see red eyes at all it would be when no light was shone on them, and given that their own night vision was washed out by dint of using the flashlight, they wouldn't have seen that, either.

This is more hogwash by those who are either play-acting non-believers or believers who have no compunction fabricating or embellishing in order to convince others of their belief. But I will retract that last bit; I think it more likely that they are not trying to convince others of the reality of bigfoot but rather the reality of the believers' tough guy status.
__________________
My kids still love me.
Garrette is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th April 2017, 05:33 AM   #3165
Drewbot
Philosopher
 
Drewbot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 5,664
Why would the Boss Of the Woods, need to lie down in the sniper position?

I would think a giant hairy primate, with massive teeth, muscles, and the ability to leap 30 feet in one motion, would be an IN YOUR FACE, intimidation type of creature, he wouldn't be pelting you with pebbles from a hillside, he'd be crashing full steam into the side of the cabin, smashing through the windows with freshly pulled tree stumps, and spray-pooping all over the porch. He wouldn't be laying down up on a hill, hoping you don't see him. This is silly.
__________________
"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
Drewbot is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th April 2017, 06:28 AM   #3166
eerok
Quixoticist
 
eerok's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 1,490
Originally Posted by Drewbot View Post
Why would the Boss Of the Woods, need to lie down in the sniper position?

I would think a giant hairy primate, with massive teeth, muscles, and the ability to leap 30 feet in one motion, would be an IN YOUR FACE, intimidation type of creature, he wouldn't be pelting you with pebbles from a hillside, he'd be crashing full steam into the side of the cabin, smashing through the windows with freshly pulled tree stumps, and spray-pooping all over the porch. He wouldn't be laying down up on a hill, hoping you don't see him. This is silly.
Your description reminded me of John Gardner's Grendel, which one could whimsically imagine as the first bigfoot. (I recommend that everyone here read that book.)
__________________
"Every saint has a past and every sinner has a future." - Oscar Wilde
eerok is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th April 2017, 09:10 AM   #3167
William Parcher
Show me the monkey!
 
William Parcher's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 16,287
Originally Posted by jerrywayne View Post
WP, the interpretation you and I have as to what is going on here reflects our basic disagreement: you virtually absent the role of belief, an irrational and religious like belief, in your explanation while I see belief's role as paramount to understanding the phenomena at Area X, as elsewhere in Bigfootville.
I pretty much don't believe anything that Brown or the other lamebrain Area Xers have to say. And I don't give a damn about what you think of my evaluation including your idea that it's irrational and religious. Jerry, I don't respect your brand of Bigfooter apologism and I never have.

These people are intentionally perpetuating the Bigfoot Myth Tradition by lying, hoaxing, and supporting hoaxing. They don't believe in Bigfoot as an actual animal. They believe in Bigfooting as an established custom, behavior, and lifestyle.
__________________
Bigfoot believers and Bigfoot skeptics are both plumb crazy. Each spends more than one minute per year thinking about Bigfoot.
William Parcher is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th April 2017, 10:20 AM   #3168
Resume
Troublesome Passenger
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 14,950
Originally Posted by William Parcher View Post
These people are intentionally perpetuating the Bigfoot Myth Tradition by lying, hoaxing, and supporting hoaxing. They don't believe in Bigfoot as an actual animal. They believe in Bigfooting as an established custom, behavior, and lifestyle.
Well your footie book collection looks all up to date
And your 45-70 has a loading gate
That eats up lots of rounds at a buck per bullet rate
Though none of these things ever get you a decent date.

But who cares about dates when drinking beers and farting
Campfire sitting pretty, mopes out wood-ape larping
Stories out of nothing, nonsense in the making
In the tent and dreaming of stuff you will be faking

How do you afford your bigfoot lifestyle?
How do you afford your bigfoot lifestyle?
How do you afford your bigfoot lifestyle.


Well, first you start a 501c3 org, then get some gullible knuckledheads to contribute so you can buy cool guns and game cams and other **** you wouldn't be able to otherwise . . .
__________________
A sentimental materialization of the kind of quasi‐rural bonhomie that seemed a millimeter from actual goose‐stepping and brown‐shirt uproars of bumpkin fascism.

Tom McGuane
Resume is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th April 2017, 11:30 AM   #3169
LTC8K6
Penultimate Amazing
 
LTC8K6's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Directly under a deadly chemtrail
Posts: 18,187
Originally Posted by Resume View Post
45-70 ammo is expensive. How nice it must be to have your pretend playground fun financed by rubes, credules, gullible yucks, fellow enthusiasts.
Well, it's cheap enough when you don't fire any of it.

It's also cheap enough relative to the value of a dead bigfoot in your possession.
__________________
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?
LTC8K6 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th April 2017, 03:01 PM   #3170
Resume
Troublesome Passenger
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 14,950
Instead of calling them enthusiasts or proponents, or even the much-debated term, BLAARger, maybe it's time to call them Bigfoot Performance Artists, or Bigfoot Entertainers.
__________________
A sentimental materialization of the kind of quasi‐rural bonhomie that seemed a millimeter from actual goose‐stepping and brown‐shirt uproars of bumpkin fascism.

Tom McGuane

Last edited by Resume; 18th April 2017 at 03:04 PM.
Resume is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th April 2017, 12:19 PM   #3171
jerrywayne
Muse
 
jerrywayne's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 908
Originally Posted by William Parcher View Post
I pretty much don't believe anything that Brown or the other lamebrain Area Xers have to say. And I don't give a damn about what you think of my evaluation including your idea that it's irrational and religious. Jerry, I don't respect your brand of Bigfooter apologism and I never have.

These people are intentionally perpetuating the Bigfoot Myth Tradition by lying, hoaxing, and supporting hoaxing. They don't believe in Bigfoot as an actual animal. They believe in Bigfooting as an established custom, behavior, and lifestyle.
Your statement doesn't ring true to me, sorry.

Since I do not believe in Bigfoot, and have made skeptical arguments against it's existence here and elsewhere, including against Bigfooters at BFF and Cryptomundo, I fail to see my alleged "Bigfooter apologism" in action. What I do see is your preference for denunciation and vilification of Bigfooters via a simple formula which I honestly think does not explain the Bigfoot phenomenon to the best effect (as an admixture of hoax, sincere but ultimately irrational belief, mistaken advocacy, dishonest advocacy, etc.)

It's the blogger plague: Prefer biased indictment to unbiased understanding.
jerrywayne is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th April 2017, 12:34 PM   #3172
William Parcher
Show me the monkey!
 
William Parcher's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 16,287
Originally Posted by jerrywayne View Post
Your statement doesn't ring true to me, sorry.

Since I do not believe in Bigfoot, and have made skeptical arguments against it's existence here and elsewhere, including against Bigfooters at BFF and Cryptomundo, I fail to see my alleged "Bigfooter apologism" in action.
The apologism comes when you say that they aren't liars and are instead true believers. One is much more bad than the other.

Quote:
What I do see is your preference for denunciation and vilification of Bigfooters via a simple formula which I honestly think does not explain the Bigfoot phenomenon to the best effect (as an admixture of hoax, sincere but ultimately irrational belief, mistaken advocacy, dishonest advocacy, etc.)

It's the blogger plague: Prefer biased indictment to unbiased understanding.
I absolutely have described Bigfooters and Bigfootery as a admixture. I'm the guy who says it's mostly hoax with some genuine misidentification thrown in.

I've also called you out many times for misrepresenting that position where you say something like "skeptics think Bigfooters do nothing but tell lies".

Here we are again Jerry, with you misrepresenting what skeptics are thinking and saying. You do it over and over and over. I don't understand it.
__________________
Bigfoot believers and Bigfoot skeptics are both plumb crazy. Each spends more than one minute per year thinking about Bigfoot.
William Parcher is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th April 2017, 01:14 PM   #3173
jerrywayne
Muse
 
jerrywayne's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 908
Originally Posted by Garrette View Post
1st highlighted section: Nonsense (their description; not necessarily your retelling of it). This is precisely the kind of detail that indicates a wannabe tough guy making something up. Go lie down in whatever you consider to be a "prone sniper position." Right next to it lie down in whatever you consider be a prone non-sniper position. Then get up and compare them. Then get some people who weren't there and tell them to find the two areas in which you lay down and then tell you which is sniper and which is non-sniper.

2nd highlighted section: Not quite as nonsensical but still tending toward it. What most people will call dusk is civil nautical twilight at which point someone with a night vision device will likely not yet be using them, but let's be generous and assume they meant astronomical twilight when someone might actually be using night vision devices. First, they wouldn't be using them if they saw someone with a flashlight nearby. Second, the people with the flashlight would not see red when the flashlight shone on the night vision device; the intense white light would completely wash out any near infrared or far infrared light being emitted by the device. If they were to see red eyes at all it would be when no light was shone on them, and given that their own night vision was washed out by dint of using the flashlight, they wouldn't have seen that, either.

This is more hogwash by those who are either play-acting non-believers or believers who have no compunction fabricating or embellishing in order to convince others of their belief. But I will retract that last bit; I think it more likely that they are not trying to convince others of the reality of bigfoot but rather the reality of the believers' tough guy status.
I agree with your view concerning the paramilitary ("tough guy") posturing of NAWAC members. I chalk it up to an attitude of macho professionalism born of the fact some members have been in the military, as well as the fact these guys are well armed. Guns and testosterone sometimes go together.

While I agree that their comments may be overripe purple prose, I disagree that they are made up in their entirely out of thin air (if that is what you are arguing for). Brown claimed the figure in the "sniper position" was human sized and shape, they could see the spread legs, and it was in position to overlook the cabin area.

As to the round eye reflection, Brown and others were moving around in the brush as night fell and he used a flashlight to look further into the brush when he spied what he took to be two large round eyes reflecting the light. I do not remember if he turned the flashlight on at that moment, or had it on earlier. Anyway, it's conceivable (to me, anyway) that a hoaxer found himself surrounded and blocked in, unable to escape and was caught looking through his binoculars or night vision glasses to check out the position of others.

(Btw, Brown, as well as other members, didn't pursue this particular "wood ape" because the sound of brush being broken around them made them think ape reinforcement was on its way and they made a B-line back to the cabin).

The important thing about these two events, to my mind: Brown related them at BFF where the existence of Bigfoot is generally not doubted. Those two events were absent in the Monograph, where a more skeptical audience would receive it. Why?

While Brown attributed the ground indention and the large round "eyes" to a wood ape, as a believer might, he probably realized too that both events could be attributed to human agency as well. At BFF, someone posted a photo of the type of visual glassware that might cause the eye reflection Brown claimed to see. I think that I chimed in somewhere to point out that a human sized "sniper position" on the ground surely would be better explained by a human laying on the ground rather than an ape.

The idea I'm trying to get across is this: Why would NAWAC reveal such events that could/would ultimately be used to argue against their narrative? If they are true events, why mention them unless you are so misguided you can't see their importance in damaging your case. On the other hand, if they are not true, why in the world you make up such stuff. For instance, if you think it would be cool to lie about a "sniper position," why not make it really huge, not the size of an average human?

Brain Brown keeps saying we have only two alternatives in what to believe about Area X: either NAWAC members are lying, or the events they describe are real. Some people here at ISF agree with him. I don't.
jerrywayne is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th April 2017, 01:45 PM   #3174
Resume
Troublesome Passenger
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 14,950
Ten + years of bigfoot stories = one **** load of out-and-out made-up silliness. I haven't read very many bigfoot encounters that didn't contain some sort of fabrication.
__________________
A sentimental materialization of the kind of quasi‐rural bonhomie that seemed a millimeter from actual goose‐stepping and brown‐shirt uproars of bumpkin fascism.

Tom McGuane
Resume is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th April 2017, 02:45 PM   #3175
jerrywayne
Muse
 
jerrywayne's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 908
Originally Posted by William Parcher View Post
The apologism comes when you say that they aren't liars and are instead true believers. One is much more bad than the other.


I absolutely have described Bigfooters and Bigfootery as a admixture. I'm the guy who says it's mostly hoax with some genuine misidentification thrown in.

I've also called you out many times for misrepresenting that position where you say something like "skeptics think Bigfooters do nothing but tell lies".

Here we are again Jerry, with you misrepresenting what skeptics are thinking and saying. You do it over and over and over. I don't understand it.
Parcher, let me say I have much more respect for you than you seem to have for me.

As to the idea I say "skeptics think Bigfooters do nothing but tell lies," let me try this analogy. Suppose you're working with a guy and during the day he complains about this or that. He doesn't like his manager, for instance, or he doesn't like his work detail that day. He complains to you at lunch he doesn't like the sandwich his wife made him. Later he complains he thinks afternoon breaks should be longer. Finally, at the end of the day, just as he complains about something else, you say "Hey, all've you done all day long is complain. I'm tired of it."

Well if he takes his cue from some skeptics here, he would reply to you, "You're a liar! You're just trolling me. I don't understand you! I didn't complain all day! I worked most of the day in silence. I used the rest room twice. I ate twinkies at morning break. I DID NOT COMPLAIN ALL DAY LONG! You are a F****** LIAR!"

I was genuinely surprised, and dismayed, when I had such a vitriolic reaction to my posts concerning GE (gaming explanation). It seemed self-evident to me that it has become the overarching explanation for Bigfootville by some here, and yes, it IS virtually the sole explanation with someone like the bush pilot, who once challenged me to name one true believer in Bigfoot. But my phrasing it as "all" (which I later changed to "virtually all") should be taken in the context of the above analogy (using a Texan's way of phrasing it). Even though I think the overall tone here is GE, I know some folks have offered explanations other than the "they're lying" trope.

To be frank, I do have problems with folks unable to distinguish between obvious hucksters like Rick Dyer and Justin Smeja, and the doctors, lawyers, former military members, teachers, biologists, other professional types, etc. that make up NAWAC. I other words, the explanation for the claims of the first group likely fails as the explanation for the claims of the second group.

Your statement with my emphasis: " I absolutely have described Bigfooters and Bigfootery as a admixture. I'm the guy who says it's mostly hoax with some genuine misidentification thrown in." That you sometimes allow for misidentification but mostly rely on the hoax hypothesis is what I would disagree with. (Btw, I do realize and agree that there is quite a lot of hoaxing going on in Bigfootville).

You and I also disagree on what constitutes "misidentification." It seems to me that both true believers and some Bigfoot skeptics take Bigfoot reports stringently literal. For instance, if we have a report of a giant bi-pedal ape seen for a couple of seconds passing between two trees, the Bigfooter will say "See, there is evidence of Bigfoot, the giant bi-pedal ape," while the skeptic will say, "See, the guy is lying because there are no such things as giant bi-pedal apes." That the reporter may have seen something totally unlike a giant bi-pedal ape doesn't seem to occur to either true believer or this brand of skeptic.

If I'm wrong, let me know. It seems that you take a literal approach to sighting reports. For example, you once argued that the idea that bears should not be generally considered culprits in Bigfoot sightings. You think most sightings are hoaxes, with a few sightings of just other people as the culprits. Am I correct?

I see a larger category of culprits. Take the Fouke Monster, Ford homestead siege, for instance. It is portrayed nowadays as a Bigfoot event. It may surprise those who believe in Bigfoot, but there is good reason to believe the whole event was caused by a nosey horse, not a monster ape. People who lived in the area told of a neighbor's unusual horse that would wonder around at night visiting other homes and peeking in the windows. Probably scared the bejabbers out of whoever experienced it. The horse was owned by a neighbor of the Ford house. The horse was found dead, riddled with bullets, sometime after the Fords and friends open fired on something moving in the brush.

Last edited by jerrywayne; 19th April 2017 at 02:48 PM.
jerrywayne is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th April 2017, 03:13 PM   #3176
William Parcher
Show me the monkey!
 
William Parcher's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 16,287
What is the evidence that a horse was shot full of bullets?
__________________
Bigfoot believers and Bigfoot skeptics are both plumb crazy. Each spends more than one minute per year thinking about Bigfoot.
William Parcher is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th April 2017, 03:24 PM   #3177
Resume
Troublesome Passenger
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 14,950
Originally Posted by jerrywayne View Post
I see a larger category of culprits. Take the Fouke Monster, Ford homestead siege, for instance. It is portrayed nowadays as a Bigfoot event.
Bigfoot entertainment.
__________________
A sentimental materialization of the kind of quasi‐rural bonhomie that seemed a millimeter from actual goose‐stepping and brown‐shirt uproars of bumpkin fascism.

Tom McGuane
Resume is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th April 2017, 04:20 PM   #3178
Garrette
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 14,484
Originally Posted by jerrywayne View Post
I agree with your view concerning the paramilitary ("tough guy") posturing of NAWAC members. I chalk it up to an attitude of macho professionalism born of the fact some members have been in the military, as well as the fact these guys are well armed. Guns and testosterone sometimes go together.

While I agree that their comments may be overripe purple prose, I disagree that they are made up in their entirely out of thin air (if that is what you are arguing for). Brown claimed the figure in the "sniper position" was human sized and shape, they could see the spread legs, and it was in position to overlook the cabin area.
And that is why I call it made up. Again, I ask you to conduct your own test by lying in a sniper position followed by a non-sniper position and see if you or someone else can tell them apart. First, unless one impresses oneself in wet sand or damp mud it is highly unlikely that a distinct form would be left, particularly one that shows separate legs and then whatever else the front end of the body is doing to show "sniper position." Even trying to do so intentionally is difficult not least because one has to both get down into that position and then back up, each of which actions helps obscure the markings left behind.

So, yes, I am arguing that separate from any larger belief or non-belief in Bigfoot, this story is made up.

Originally Posted by jerrywayne
As to the round eye reflection, Brown and others were moving around in the brush as night fell and he used a flashlight to look further into the brush when he spied what he took to be two large round eyes reflecting the light. I do not remember if he turned the flashlight on at that moment, or had it on earlier. Anyway, it's conceivable (to me, anyway) that a hoaxer found himself surrounded and blocked in, unable to escape and was caught looking through his binoculars or night vision glasses to check out the position of others.
Not just round eyes -- round and red eyes. It's the red part that was key to my discussion above. I didn't even get into the fact that surprising the figure in a standing position sort of obviates the claim about finding the outline of a sniper position in the same area because the standing person would have helped obscure any markings.

So I will say it again: the story is not simple embellishment of an actual event. It is made up.


Originally Posted by Jerrywayne
(Btw, Brown, as well as other members, didn't pursue this particular "wood ape" because the sound of brush being broken around them made them think ape reinforcement was on its way and they made a B-line back to the cabin).

The important thing about these two events, to my mind: Brown related them at BFF where the existence of Bigfoot is generally not doubted. Those two events were absent in the Monograph, where a more skeptical audience would receive it. Why?

While Brown attributed the ground indention and the large round "eyes" to a wood ape, as a believer might, he probably realized too that both events could be attributed to human agency as well. At BFF, someone posted a photo of the type of visual glassware that might cause the eye reflection Brown claimed to see. I think that I chimed in somewhere to point out that a human sized "sniper position" on the ground surely would be better explained by a human laying on the ground rather than an ape.

The idea I'm trying to get across is this: Why would NAWAC reveal such events that could/would ultimately be used to argue against their narrative? If they are true events, why mention them unless you are so misguided you can't see their importance in damaging your case. On the other hand, if they are not true, why in the world you make up such stuff. For instance, if you think it would be cool to lie about a "sniper position," why not make it really huge, not the size of an average human?

Brain Brown keeps saying we have only two alternatives in what to believe about Area X: either NAWAC members are lying, or the events they describe are real. Some people here at ISF agree with him. I don't.
The first part I highlighted answers the second part I highlighted.
__________________
My kids still love me.
Garrette is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th April 2017, 05:21 AM   #3179
Drewbot
Philosopher
 
Drewbot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 5,664
The BFF wasn't very receptive to the NAWAC.

I remember:
* The Tree breaking incident,
* Bigfoot laying down and being mistaken for a log by Bob Strain
* giant slingshot being fired up on the hill where the Rocks were coming from.
* The 10 round shotgun burst fired, near the couple parked in the impossible to get to area, by Daryl Colyer, and no one else saw the beast.
* The guy firing rounds from the the tipping lawn chair in the river bed, when he thought a Bigfoot was charging him through the bushes.

None of these were accepted by even long time Bigfooters.

I even received moral support from some of the mods and admins at BFF when pointing out the silliness of these claims.
__________________
"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
Drewbot is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th April 2017, 05:23 AM   #3180
Drewbot
Philosopher
 
Drewbot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 5,664
We should start a Non-profit called NAWAQ

North American Wood Ape Quest.
__________________
"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
Drewbot is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th April 2017, 07:22 AM   #3181
Cervelo
Graduate Poster
 
Cervelo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Posts: 1,246
Jerrywayne...your first mistake is you assume all the stories are true, that in itself is very telling of your perspective, but hey this isn't about you.
It doesn't matter if there are a few doofuses that have bought into the NAWACKY nonsense, they are just cannon fodder for the ultimate goal. This is no different than PGF, just a brief look into the background of the major players and all is revealed.
The goal is gold and glory....the model is BFRO/Not Finding Bigfoot, Brian Brown was at BFRO, left started BFF....then latched onto NAWACKY on the hope it would generate the kind of interest that Not Finding Bigfoot has.
There is no doubt the most fascinating part of this social construct is the "true believers" and the charlatans that lead the way, but the motivations of the two groups are at opposite ends of the spectrum. They sometimes overlap a pinch but very rarely.

Last edited by Cervelo; 20th April 2017 at 07:23 AM.
Cervelo is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th April 2017, 11:45 PM   #3182
LTC8K6
Penultimate Amazing
 
LTC8K6's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Directly under a deadly chemtrail
Posts: 18,187
Originally Posted by William Parcher View Post
What is the evidence that a horse was shot full of bullets?
Yeah, you'd think pumping your neighbor's horse full of lead would create a stir.

Well, if they couldn't recognize hoofprints in the ground outside their windows, it's a cinch they couldn't tell the difference between a horse and anything else that might be moving in their vicinity in the woods...

It's also not a stretch to imagine footers blasting away at "something" in the woods that they can't identify, since we know they have done this a few times.
__________________
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?
LTC8K6 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st April 2017, 04:15 AM   #3183
Garrette
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 14,484
Originally Posted by LTC8K6 View Post
Yeah, you'd think pumping your neighbor's horse full of lead would create a stir.

Well, if they couldn't recognize hoofprints in the ground outside their windows, it's a cinch they couldn't tell the difference between a horse and anything else that might be moving in their vicinity in the woods...

It's also not a stretch to imagine footers blasting away at "something" in the woods that they can't identify, since we know they have done this a few times.
Or discern from ground markings that someone had lain in a "prone sniper position."
__________________
My kids still love me.
Garrette is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st April 2017, 09:38 AM   #3184
Resume
Troublesome Passenger
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 14,950
Originally Posted by jerrywayne View Post
To be frank, I do have problems with folks unable to distinguish between obvious hucksters like Rick Dyer and Justin Smeja, and the doctors, lawyers, former military members, teachers, biologists, other professional types, etc. that make up NAWAC. I other words, the explanation for the claims of the first group likely fails as the explanation for the claims of the second group.
What makes the highlighted group exempt from lying and/or hoaxing? Doctors, lawyers, military, teachers, biologists, and professionals all have been convicted of everything from child rape to multiple murders. What's a little in-group lie/practical joke? "Obvious hucksters" are obvious most often after they're exposed. You seem very naïve about this.
__________________
A sentimental materialization of the kind of quasi‐rural bonhomie that seemed a millimeter from actual goose‐stepping and brown‐shirt uproars of bumpkin fascism.

Tom McGuane
Resume is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Yesterday, 04:12 PM   #3185
HarryHenderson
Graduate Poster
 
HarryHenderson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: All up in your business!
Posts: 1,474
Our derision and criticism of NAWAC for not having any Bigfoot evidence despite their endless non-evidenced claims to the contrary is akin to prosecuting the murderer who says he was at the Dairy Queen but no way to prove it. Yet their criticism and derision of us is like being yelled at for using embossed toilet paper.
HarryHenderson is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » General Skepticism and The Paranormal

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 04:37 PM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
© 2014, TribeTech AB. All Rights Reserved.
This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.