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
 

Notices


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 Arlene Gaal , bigfoot , cryptozoology , flatwoods monster , Ken Chaplin , lake worth monster , loch ness monster , onza , panthers , Trunko

Reply
Old 17th November 2012, 12:02 AM   #81
Dinwar
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 13,680
Originally Posted by foxholeatheist View Post
I wanted to ask you because of your experience in the North:

Do you ever find bear carcasses? That's a oft repeated bigfooter claim that they never do but my woods experience has generally been in low-density bear areas. I'm sure that in an area where there are bears you would.

In Eastern WA I once found a bear's jawbone.

You are correct sir: Many times I have been picking mushrooms or looking for a tree stand site or just walking through the woods and you get that death smell from somewhere. Once my wife and I were trout fishing along a stream in Missouri and caught that scent. The water was falling after a good spring rain and the browns and bows were biting good. Up on a gravel bank upstream from where we filled our water bottles was a massive bloated dead cow on the bank.
Dead bodies don't last as long in the wild as people think. Up near Tehachapi, CA a dead cow won't last 48 hours--meaning that the time between the cow's death and there not BEING a cow is two days. Leaves very little time for finding dead things. Also, you've got to have fairly sharp eyes to spot them. I've found innumerable bits of bone and things from all sorts of critters in the desert, but that's because I spend a good deal of time looking at bits of bone and so have trained my eyes to see them. Someone like, say, my father, who's a civil engineer and doesn't look at bones outside the diner table, isn't going to see a quarter of what I do.
__________________
GENERATION 8: The first time you see this, copy it into your sig on any forum and add 1 to the generation. Social experiment.

I swear, by my life and my love of it, that I will never live for the sake of another man, nor ask another man to live for mine.
Dinwar 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 November 2012, 08:59 AM   #82
Sonny2
Muse
 
Sonny2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 669
I've spent a lot of time hiking in bear country in Colorado and Alaska and only seen a couple of skeletons, and they were deer. I think Bigfoot eats dead bodies, bones and all, he's the zombie of the animal world.
Sonny2 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 November 2012, 06:59 PM   #83
jerrywayne
Muse
 
jerrywayne's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 664
A Tragic Misidentification

In the book Lake Monster Mysteries by Radford and Nickell, in an appendix on Eyewitness (Un)Reliability, Radford mentions a tragic event that demonstrates just how erroneous eyewitness identifications sometimes are.

In January, 2004, a man named Dennis Plucknett, his two sons, and a friend went hunting in northeastern Florida. Breaking camp early one morning, the hunters separated, with Plucknett's 14 year old son Alex sitting in a ditch over 200 yards from his father.

Someone called out "Hog" and Dennis grabbed and aimed his .308 rifle with scope at a hog in the distance. Mr. Plucknett then shot the "hog," killing his son Alex with a shot to the head.

Writes Radford: It was an accident, a terrible mistake, but there was more to it than that. The elder Plucknett mistook his son's black toboggan cap for a boar. This longtime hunter couldn't distinquish a piece of cloth less than a square foot wide from a living, full-size animal. Dennis Plucknett had years of experience, good vision, and a rifle scope. He believed he had a boar in his sights, instead of his son's head. Because someone called out "Hog," Plucknett's mind was searching for a hog, and his expectations clearly guided his perceptions. A small black cap became a hog in his mind. (p.162)

Radford goes on to make several points, including this: A similar process occurs in lakes and woods where mysterious creatures are said to lurk. Waves, large fish, and logs are thus turned lake monsters; bear, elk, and other creatures are turned into Bigfoot. The process is well documented, but many cryptozoologists insist that eyewitnesses are more reliable than they are. (p.162)
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 22nd November 2012, 08:13 AM   #84
bruto
Penultimate Amazing
 
bruto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 14,468
The case above reminds me of one in Maine 20 years or so ago, in which a woman who was hanging laundry in her backyard while wearing white mittens was shot by a hunter who was convinced she was a deer. To the dismay of many, the hunter was acquitted as having simply misidentified his target.
__________________
Sir, I have found you an argument; but I am not obliged to find you an understanding. (Samuel Johnson)

I love this world, but not for its answers. (Mary Oliver)
bruto 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 22nd November 2012, 12:07 PM   #85
Sonny2
Muse
 
Sonny2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 669
And yet the hunting community will tell you they're all safe hunters. I used to have to run hunters off my land - they would come right up into my back yard after deer. My uncle has had them shoot his cattle, thinking they were elk (the old joke is that Texans think cattle are slow elk). They even shot one of his horses once. Hell, they even shoot each other, as the tragedy above points out.

So why would footers be any safer than actual hunters (and a number of footers seem to also be hunters). Especially when the adreneline gets flowing.

Last edited by Sonny2; 22nd November 2012 at 12:08 PM.
Sonny2 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 22nd November 2012, 01:14 PM   #86
AlaskaBushPilot
Master Poster
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 2,179
Well there isn't a "hunting community" in any organized sense. Anyone with a gun and the application fee is a hunter.

I do understand how misidentifications can happen. Every time I shot at a stripper it turned out to be a moose, caribou, deer or something.
AlaskaBushPilot 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 22nd November 2012, 02:52 PM   #87
StankApe
Banned
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 4,628
In my experience hunters who are members of clubs hunting on leased/private land are much more responsible than those who are out on public land.

I don't know if this is due to the higher financial investment ,or the fact that they risk being ousted or risk the club's leases...etc But almost every stupid accident that I have read about was yokels out on the public land.
StankApe 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 22nd November 2012, 03:37 PM   #88
Sonny2
Muse
 
Sonny2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 669
You forgot about Cheney.
Sonny2 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 23rd November 2012, 09:45 AM   #89
William Parcher
Show me the monkey!
 
William Parcher's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 10,704
Originally Posted by Ben Radford writes
Waves, large fish, and logs are thus turned lake monsters; bear, elk, and other creatures are turned into Bigfoot. The process is well documented, but many cryptozoologists insist that eyewitnesses are more reliable than they are.
Radford doesn't actually know that people are seeing bears and elk and then misidentifying them as being Bigfoot. You see, the alternative to a misidentification is an outright fabrication. He can't know which is which unless he is standing next to a person who says "Look at that Bigfoot!" and it is actually a bear and Radford sees that it is a bear. Even then he doesn't know if the person actually believes what they are saying.

IOW, nobody really knows if "R. Jacobs" actually believes that this bear is a Bigfoot. This person could be lying, and thinks that it is a bear just like the rest of us.
Attached Images
File Type: jpg Rick-Jacobs-Bigfoot-picture.jpg (55.3 KB, 104 views)
__________________
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 23rd November 2012, 10:17 AM   #90
Jodie
Master Poster
 
Jodie's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 2,555
The arms always looked too long to be a bear's and the head from that perspective looks to be the size of a watermelon in proportion to the body. I have no idea what I'm looking at and neither does anyone else.
__________________
testis unus, testis nullus
quod gratis asseritur, gratis negatur
Jodie 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 23rd November 2012, 10:34 AM   #91
William Parcher
Show me the monkey!
 
William Parcher's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 10,704
Originally Posted by Jodie View Post
I have no idea what I'm looking at and neither does anyone else.
It's almost as if you haven't left Bigfootery behind at all.
__________________
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 23rd November 2012, 10:37 AM   #92
The Shrike
Master Poster
 
The Shrike's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 2,844
Originally Posted by Jodie View Post
. . . I have no idea what I'm looking at and neither does anyone else.
Emphasis mine. Objection mine. I know darned well that I'm looking at a bear in that photo.
The Shrike 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 23rd November 2012, 11:10 AM   #93
River
Illuminator
 
River's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 3,644
This is what I see (roughly) on the jacobs photos.



__________________
“Don't believe everything you see on the Internet.” ― Abraham Lincoln
River 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 23rd November 2012, 11:22 AM   #94
Jodie
Master Poster
 
Jodie's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 2,555
Originally Posted by William Parcher View Post
It's almost as if you haven't left Bigfootery behind at all.
I make a distinction between being interested in cryptids and the offal promulgated by other people interested in cryptids. That would include you, by the way .
__________________
testis unus, testis nullus
quod gratis asseritur, gratis negatur
Jodie 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 23rd November 2012, 11:24 AM   #95
Jodie
Master Poster
 
Jodie's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 2,555
Originally Posted by The Shrike View Post
Emphasis mine. Objection mine. I know darned well that I'm looking at a bear in that photo.
Do you? How? Refer me to anything already posted that you agree with, unlike some, you actually seem to know what you are talking about so I'm willing to consider it.
__________________
testis unus, testis nullus
quod gratis asseritur, gratis negatur
Jodie 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 23rd November 2012, 11:32 AM   #96
William Parcher
Show me the monkey!
 
William Parcher's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 10,704
Originally Posted by River View Post
This is what I see (roughly) on the jacobs photos.
What was the time lapse between those two pictures?
__________________
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 23rd November 2012, 11:34 AM   #97
William Parcher
Show me the monkey!
 
William Parcher's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 10,704
Originally Posted by Jodie View Post
I make a distinction between being interested in cryptids and the offal promulgated by other people interested in cryptids. That would include you, by the way .
I don't know what you are saying here.

But I wouldn't mind if you think I am full of crap. If that is what you are saying.
__________________
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 23rd November 2012, 11:48 AM   #98
The Shrike
Master Poster
 
The Shrike's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 2,844
Originally Posted by Jodie View Post
Do you? How? Refer me to anything already posted that you agree with, unlike some, you actually seem to know what you are talking about so I'm willing to consider it.
How 'bout the bear paws at the end of the hind legs?
The Shrike 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 23rd November 2012, 11:51 AM   #99
River
Illuminator
 
River's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 3,644
Originally Posted by William Parcher View Post
What was the time lapse between those two pictures?

Here are the images they published. 1, 2, 3. They're all time stamped. (who knows if they're accurate or altered? "looks legit" lol)
__________________
“Don't believe everything you see on the Internet.” ― Abraham Lincoln

Last edited by River; 23rd November 2012 at 11:55 AM.
River 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 23rd November 2012, 12:00 PM   #100
William Parcher
Show me the monkey!
 
William Parcher's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 10,704
Originally Posted by River View Post
They're all time stamped.
OK, so I guess there was enough time for another bear to enter the scene. So the head curled under could be a second bear.

Two little bears wrasslin' round with each other could end up looking like a single bear about to do a headstand. Eh?
__________________
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 23rd November 2012, 12:08 PM   #101
River
Illuminator
 
River's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 3,644
Originally Posted by William Parcher View Post
OK, so I guess there was enough time for another bear to enter the scene. So the head curled under could be a second bear.

Two little bears wrasslin' round with each other could end up looking like a single bear about to do a headstand. Eh?

Yeah, there was enough time. I think it's just licking/chewing its back leg/knee area? That mange might be a bit itchy.
__________________
“Don't believe everything you see on the Internet.” ― Abraham Lincoln
River 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 23rd November 2012, 12:09 PM   #102
Sonny2
Muse
 
Sonny2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 669
A bear eating a watermelon.

I think River got the first one, don't know about the second cause it doesn't make sense to me no matter how I look at it. But if follows that if the first is a bear, so is the second.
Sonny2 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 23rd November 2012, 12:23 PM   #103
Jodie
Master Poster
 
Jodie's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 2,555
Originally Posted by The Shrike View Post
How 'bout the bear paws at the end of the hind legs?
Yep, doesn't look like a foot at all, you are right.
__________________
testis unus, testis nullus
quod gratis asseritur, gratis negatur
Jodie 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 23rd November 2012, 12:26 PM   #104
William Parcher
Show me the monkey!
 
William Parcher's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 10,704
Originally Posted by River View Post
They're all time stamped. (who knows if they're accurate or altered? "looks legit" lol)

The logo, date and timestamps may be counterfeit.

I haven't been able to find any other Bushnell images on the web where those things are placed on the exposed image itself instead of on a solid-colored lower border(s).

Can anybody find others that show that information like these?
__________________
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 23rd November 2012, 12:39 PM   #105
River
Illuminator
 
River's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 3,644
Even if it was accurate to the model camera allegedly used, that stuff can be digitally altered. (exif data as well) If someone was serious about it, they could alter a lot. I don't think that is the case here though. That weird position could just be the bear rubbing its head on the ground/root as well.
__________________
“Don't believe everything you see on the Internet.” ― Abraham Lincoln
River 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 23rd November 2012, 12:41 PM   #106
Sonny2
Muse
 
Sonny2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 669
You can also take a photo of a photo and it alters everything that's stamped by the camera. IOW, I can photograph an old photo and it now has a new timestamp. This will also apply to settings, etc., so one can PS a photo then take a photo of it and it's really hard to tell it's been PSed unless it's just obvious from the getgo.
Sonny2 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 23rd November 2012, 01:01 PM   #107
William Parcher
Show me the monkey!
 
William Parcher's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 10,704
Originally Posted by William Parcher View Post
Can anybody find others that show that information like these?
I finally did.
Attached Images
File Type: jpg 2_4410.jpg (123.6 KB, 9 views)
__________________
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 23rd November 2012, 02:11 PM   #108
jerrywayne
Muse
 
jerrywayne's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 664
Originally Posted by William Parcher View Post
Radford doesn't actually know that people are seeing bears and elk and then misidentifying them as being Bigfoot. You see, the alternative to a misidentification is an outright fabrication. He can't know which is which unless he is standing next to a person who says "Look at that Bigfoot!" and it is actually a bear and Radford sees that it is a bear. Even then he doesn't know if the person actually believes what they are saying.

IOW, nobody really knows if "R. Jacobs" actually believes that this bear is a Bigfoot. This person could be lying, and thinks that it is a bear just like the rest of us.
You are right, of course, speaking in the particular. But generally, I think we can assume that bears, elk, etc., have been responsible for some Bigfoot sightings.

To give a scenario: a backpacker hiking the backwoods sees something a distance away he does not immediately recognise. In fact, he is seeing the ass end of a moose, with the moose's front end buried in the brush. The hiker stops and looks, seeing only something big and hairy, standing on two legs. The moose advances into the brush and the hiker sees the two legged beast move away and disappear.

Now, this doesn't make a Bigfoot sighting -- except. Except, as the hiker makes his way back to camp or car, he is thinking Bigfoot. He has seen the Legend of Boggy Creek, Monster Quest, and Finding Bigfoot. Could what he saw be Bigfoot? Now he is "remembering" things he didn't actually see, such as thinking he saw the Bigfoot glance back at him as it stepped into the brush. (What he really saw, indistinctly, was a tree limb move as the moose brushed it with its antlers.)

I understand this is pure speculation, although I think it is a plausible one. You have a good point that singular or anomalous events are not exactly knowable to those not on the scene.

I get the impression you think most cryptid sightings are outright fabrications, and not misidentifications.
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 23rd November 2012, 02:26 PM   #109
FFed
Muse
 
FFed's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 932
Originally Posted by jerrywayne View Post
Cryptozoology, unlike zoology, depends primarily on eyewitness accounts. Some cryptozoology enthusiasts understand that eyewitness testimonies are not definitive because of the potential problems inherent in such accounts. Other advocates accept, at least provisionally, sightings, and others accept a body of eyewitness stories as surely valid.

I would like to examine various aspects of particular cryptid or unknown animal sightings to make a general argument that skeptics are rightfully doubting of eyewitness testimonies when it comes to the extraordinary claims of undocumented, unknown or out-of-place large animals.

My first example relates to the alleged lake "monster" said to live in British Columbia's Lake Okanagan and nick-named "Ogopogo."

In 1989, Ken Chaplin and his father and daughter thought they saw Ogopogo entering an inlet area on the lake. Chaplin said he was between 75ft to 100ft away from the creature. He "saw [the creature's] features very clearly" and it was "snake or lizard like" with "no fur or hair;" his sister saw a long snake-like body over 15ft long.

Sounds like Chaplin and family had a typical Ogopogo sighting. He had no question as to what he saw. Unfortunately for Ogopogo lore, Chaplin not only saw the creature, he video recorded it too--twice. What he recorded was obviously not an anomalous lake serpent/monster.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iyb-h...feature=relmfu

Even after his recording was shown to represent a common animal, he and his sister refused to accept the mundane verdict.

Enter the local Ogopogo "expert," Arlene Gaal, to also deny that Chaplin recorded a common animal and to state he filmed a "miniature" Ogopogo.

This is a straightforward demonstration that people don't always see what they believe they are seeing, and that cryptozoological "experts" can be blind to the obvious.
It's Okanagan Lake, not Lake Okanagan. It's like me going East and calling Lake Superior, Superior Lake.

Arlene Gaal is a self proclaimed Ogopogo expert and is nothing but an attention seeker. She will proclaim anything and everything Ogopogo so she can sell more stuff and get on TV.

Most people who see Ogopogo have no idea about wave action on lakes such as Okanagan or Kalamalka, which is next to Okanagan Lake. The Okanagan is a tourist trap full of Albertans in the summer and every rogue wave is Ogopogo. There have been many people who have claimed to have video evidence of Ogopogo, but will not show the evidence unless they are paid thousands. That kind of money grabbing garbage, the want to see Ogopogo, and the ignorance of wave action on Okanagan Lake, and the need to sell souvenirs to the tourists are a big reason why the myth of Ogopogo stays alive.
FFed 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 23rd November 2012, 02:39 PM   #110
jerrywayne
Muse
 
jerrywayne's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 664
My Cryptid Sighting

When I was a teenager I hiked solo in a flood control area, a wooded area with open grassland, not too far from home. It was a sunny, summer day.

I had just crossed a grassy area and was moving into to the woods. I ducked under a low hanging branch and walked into a spider-web, face first. Immediately, I started wiping my face with my hands, and was a little creeped out.

I had moved from the bright sun into deep shade. Looking ahead, I saw what looked to be a giant garden spider. I mean giant! The spider's body was about the size of a house-lamp light bulb. Its legs looked almost a foot long. It was either on the trunk of the tree, or on a tree-limb, not-moving.

Only a second or two, and I was gone. I went the way I came and never looked back. To be frank, I was a bit frightened. Seeing something that shouldn't be will do that to you.

Later, I questioned my experience. Did I see the thing clearly or was it a side glance or just a quick see? Did I see a spider or something I imagined a spider, such as a dead leaf attached to a spindly tree-limb?

Doubtful it was really a giant garden spider. A face-full of spider-web probably put me in the mind of seeing one, and the normal garden spider had always intrigued me with its size and motionless solitude. I was primed, if only for that singular moment, to see my own cryptid.
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 23rd November 2012, 03:01 PM   #111
jerrywayne
Muse
 
jerrywayne's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 664
Originally Posted by FFed View Post
It's Okanagan Lake, not Lake Okanagan. It's like me going East and calling Lake Superior, Superior Lake.

Arlene Gaal is a self proclaimed Ogopogo expert and is nothing but an attention seeker. She will proclaim anything and everything Ogopogo so she can sell more stuff and get on TV.

Most people who see Ogopogo have no idea about wave action on lakes such as Okanagan or Kalamalka, which is next to Okanagan Lake. The Okanagan is a tourist trap full of Albertans in the summer and every rogue wave is Ogopogo. There have been many people who have claimed to have video evidence of Ogopogo, but will not show the evidence unless they are paid thousands. That kind of money grabbing garbage, the want to see Ogopogo, and the ignorance of wave action on Okanagan Lake, and the need to sell souvenirs to the tourists are a big reason why the myth of Ogopogo stays alive.
Here is video of wave action at Okanagan Lake: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2qmGs0clU8c

Here is video of what appears to be otters on the lake:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QWFkQ...eature=related
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 23rd November 2012, 03:08 PM   #112
William Parcher
Show me the monkey!
 
William Parcher's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 10,704
I'll start with this...

Originally Posted by Radford
bear, elk, and other creatures are turned into Bigfoot.
He doesn't even mention mis-IDs of other humans who are just out doing normal things and not even trying to look like Bigfoot (a hoaxer). Why are we talking about bear and elk when a woman in dark clothing could be identified as a Bigfoot by mistake?


Originally Posted by jerrywayne
But generally, I think we can assume that bears, elk, etc., have been responsible for some Bigfoot sightings.
I agree, but in my opinion mis-IDs of non-human animals would not be statistically significant... IMO, they would amount to less than 1% of all claimed sightings of Bigfoot.

Quote:
I get the impression you think most cryptid sightings are outright fabrications, and not misidentifications.
Well, it depends on which cryptid you are talking about. Again this is my opinion only but here are two opposite examples of cryptids...


Claimed modern sightings of living Ivory-billed Woodpeckers (a cryptid):
Fabrication... 10%
Misidentification... 90% (with Pileated Woodpeckers accounting for 90% of that)

Claimed sightings of Bigfoot (a cryptid):
Fabrication... 90%
Misidentification... 10% (with non-hoaxing humans accounting for 99% of that)
__________________
Bigfoot believers and Bigfoot skeptics are both plumb crazy. Each spends more than one minute per year thinking about Bigfoot.

Last edited by William Parcher; 23rd November 2012 at 03:09 PM.
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 23rd November 2012, 03:10 PM   #113
GT/CS
Illuminator
 
GT/CS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 4,113
I think most of the large dark blobs people see from 100 yards away among the trees and brush are deer or bear, not humans.
__________________
SweatyYeti or Bill Munns would be my vote for looking at this - BFSleuth @ BFF
I've got plenty of common sense! I just choose to ignore it. - Calvin; October 15, 1986
GT/CS 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 23rd November 2012, 03:15 PM   #114
River
Illuminator
 
River's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 3,644
Originally Posted by jerrywayne View Post
Here is video of wave action at Okanagan Lake: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2qmGs0clU8c

Here is video of what appears to be otters on the lake:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QWFkQ...eature=related

Second video could be grass carp.
__________________
“Don't believe everything you see on the Internet.” ― Abraham Lincoln
River 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 23rd November 2012, 03:23 PM   #115
William Parcher
Show me the monkey!
 
William Parcher's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 10,704
Another reason why it depends on which cryptid you are talking about is that we may or may not have a good sense of the predominant personality type of the claimants. We have that for Bigfooters where there is a general lack of innocent honesty.

I think one of the big reasons why great numbers of people tell lies about seeing Bigfoot is because Bigfootery is extremely protective and gives real meaningful sanctuary to liars. People who like to tell folk tales automatically realize that Bigfootery is a great place for them. They are actually needed by Bigfootery. The liar knows this.
__________________
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 23rd November 2012, 03:25 PM   #116
William Parcher
Show me the monkey!
 
William Parcher's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 10,704
Originally Posted by GT/CS View Post
I think most of the large dark blobs people see from 100 yards away among the trees and brush are deer or bear, not humans.
In your opinion, what percentage of those people go on to make formal reports to BFRO or BFF, etc?
__________________
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 23rd November 2012, 03:29 PM   #117
Sonny2
Muse
 
Sonny2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 669
I would love to see someone do a real study (and by real I mean with the necessary parameters used by social scientists to decrease bias) of Footers personality types vs the rest of the population.
Sonny2 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 23rd November 2012, 03:30 PM   #118
Jodie
Master Poster
 
Jodie's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 2,555
Originally Posted by GT/CS View Post
I think most of the large dark blobs people see from 100 yards away among the trees and brush are deer or bear, not humans.
They look like shade variation from the leaves picked up by the camera and not necessarily by the human eye in 3D vision, which is why they never see them in person while they are there in the area.
__________________
testis unus, testis nullus
quod gratis asseritur, gratis negatur

Last edited by Jodie; 23rd November 2012 at 03:31 PM.
Jodie 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 23rd November 2012, 03:33 PM   #119
Jodie
Master Poster
 
Jodie's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 2,555
Originally Posted by Sonny2 View Post
I would love to see someone do a real study (and by real I mean with the necessary parameters used by social scientists to decrease bias) of Footers personality types vs the rest of the population.

I did a rough unscientific Myers Briggs on the BFF, overwhelmingly they were all introverts and the skeptics tended to be extroverts.
__________________
testis unus, testis nullus
quod gratis asseritur, gratis negatur
Jodie 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 23rd November 2012, 03:38 PM   #120
Sonny2
Muse
 
Sonny2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 669
Interesting, Jodie. I would have suspected that.

As for seeing bears, the few times I have seen bears in the wilds, there wasn't much misidentification, as their dark color seems to really stand out against the foliage. Even when I could only catch a few glimpses, it was pretty obvious I was looking at bear - even the lighter cinnamon colors.

And thus the mindset jerrywayne mentions - it must be there already to see BF instead of bear. And this also couples with Parcher's suspicions of dishonesty. You want to see BF, so you see it. Never mind what you really saw.

Throw in the thrills of telling the story, plus the societal blessings, and you're quite the deal now. You can even make yourslef believe yourself, given enough time and denial.

Last edited by Sonny2; 23rd November 2012 at 03:41 PM.
Sonny2 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 11:43 AM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2014, 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.