Korean Job Discussion Forums

[RACETRAITOR]

[mindmetoo]

[anyway]

Good, well, I bet that guy felt a little embarrased, eh? So, now you've referenced chupacabras, ghosts, and UFOs in this discussion. Is it safe to assume that you don't believe in any of those things?

As I mentioned in the OP, I believe that the debate about bigfoot is certainly much different than those other issues because of 1) people can readily identify a large mammal when they see one, and 2) it cannot be confused with many other phenomenon. In fact, the sightings are almost always explained as 'seeing a bear'. UFOs, ghosts, etc. have more possible explanations.

However, if one reads the reports, one will find many, many backwoods people who, in their own words dripping with sincerity, explain their years of experience with the forest, hunting, tracking, game animals - especially the alternate explanation - bears. (Who can say the same thing in the UFO/ghost/etc. debate?) Then it becomes hard for me to doubt them. They are experts and they say 'no way' can a bear be that tall, run that fast/long on two legs, look that human, etc.

Why would these people lie to themselves, their families, friends, etc. about such an experience and risk massive amounts of ridicule and personal or professional loss? Because they know what they saw - a large animal which was definitely NOT a bear.

Another difference in between bigfoot and other controversies: there happens to be fossil and bone evidence of a large primate that COULD HAVE migrated over the Arctic land bridge long ago. This explanation seems plausible. Native American tribes have spoken of these beings for a long long time.

One of the most interesting facts which stands out from reading the reports is this. Many hunters who have used their rifle scopes to view the animals in question did NOT fire on the animal because it was SO very human looking that they weren't sure it wasn't a human!

It's important to remember that this case involves trail cam photos of a guy who is a bear hunter. He decided that the photos weren't conclusive and brought them to the attention of the BFRO people. He could've been looking for money. He could've staged them. He could've tampered with the photos, etc. I'll admit those are possibilities.

However our debate assumes he did not, so what in the heck are we looking at?

Now let's look at another image that someone seems to think shows a face in the right picture (they played with the contrast)...

http://s2.excoboard.com/exco/thread.php?forumid=151130&threadid=1724609&page=2

[mindmetoo]

[anyway]

[anyway]

Yes, yes, of course, you raise some valid points. People senses are sometimes wrong. Our eyes play tricks. Well done.

I suppose the existence of these creatures (not to mention extra-terrestial lfe forms) would be a terrible blow to science and scientists, eh? I used to see a Russian astrophysicist at the local bar and I would always ask him about UFOs, etc. He really didn't like those questions and dismissed them out of hand. Too much to invested in their non-existence, I suppose. If science doesn't approve, hrrmmmph.

If you care to get back to the photos, 'let's talk' as you say.

[mindmetoo]

[Czarjorge]

Some of the newest work in theoretical physics argues that the act of perceiving something actually affects what is perceived. If that works on small particles maybe in can turn a bear into bigfoot.

Or, again this is actually some of the work being done currently in theoretical physics not me taking a piss, that by looking at the picture and perceiving it as a bigfoot you are creating an alternate reality where the creature in the image is a bigfoot, not a bear. We are just unlucky enough to live in the original reality where none of the fun stuff happens.

[anyway]

I started this thread to get other's opinions, remember? I questioned it because I do not believe in that the camera flashed at the instant in which the bear's eye was closed. Apparently, you do. I don't see why that photo should hide the facial features when the left photo does not, do you?

I've always wondered how any scientist can actually claim something to be extinct in his own lifetime. Do they actually think they can know these things with certainty? Aye, what a blow bigfoot would be to their egos...

Let's not be facetious. This theory arose from more than one photo and far more evidence/outstanding details than a tall man with a black hat? Do maintain some decency.

You yourself can easily satisfy your curiosity about the dimensions of the anatomy by perusing the forums of the site with the photos. You can then judge if there are any 'experts' among them. Probably a few park rangers among them. I suggested different lengths. The foot is very obviously pointing 90 degrees in the wrong direction...

Yes, 'no evidence that it is troubling' from your perspective - indeed, if you believe every word a 'scientist/expert' has ever breathed. Then, why do you call for experts on the other side?! Don't be willing to trust in any park ranger - investigate and think for yourself.

So, are you suggesting that every one of these eyewitness reports was of 'a bear'? 8-10 feet tall (or more) and running on two legs at great speed? Or were they all just optical illusions? Perhaps both?

[mindmetoo]

[RACETRAITOR]

[anyway]

Yes, eyes 'angled down'. So, then the bear in the left's photos are open and not angles down? Not hard to believe at all. Poor quality photo, too. Thus, the disappearance of an entire face.

The arrogance is that 'I have not seen any samples. Therefore there must not be any.'

Which link did you supply and how do you know I had not seen it myself? I am not asking nearly as many questions as you are, so I am not in need of investigating. So, I mean investigate the questions which you are asking me.

Like a good scientist you are asking far far more than you are answering.

I give up, sir. I tip my hat to you and your prodigious knowledge base. Thanks for your insights and wonderful sense of inquiry. I see you have marshaled the facts of many many disciplines.

[RACETRAITOR]

[mindmetoo]

[anyway]