Belittling Bigfoot

While there are still many people set on providing proof that such a creature exists it's come to my attention that they are not pushing full steam ahead. Unsure of whether it is lack of commitment, evidence or cooperation. Bigfoot is in a lowly state, currently. Even those looked upon with a loving gaze are hard pressed to produce anything worth interest. It's the same old recycled garbage being thrust over and over. How much longer will it go on? How much longer will followers stay faith based? How much longer will certain researchers pardon themselves as well as their supposed evidence? Is this common in the world of new discoveries? I'd bet not. 

Disturbing the Peace

In addition to stalking I've noted that researchers have a flair for dramatics. They wait until after dark, sometimes into the wee hours of night, and begin banging on trees and emitting blood curdling screams in an attempt to capture the attention of large, bipedal,hairy primates that supposedly populate the North American forests. 

I don't even have to say anything else. Let that sink in for a bit. 

Explaining Bigfoot Away

I think it'd be a whole lot healthier if people were to go out with an agenda to find no evidence of Bigfoot. I truly feel the concept of nature is being ignored and disrespected to a high degree. Many researchers are heading out with vast knowledge of Bigfoot activity they've heard or read about many times. I feel like they are aligning every natural happening with an association to Bigfoot. I'm not saying there is absolutely no Bigfoot activity but it appears there is too much being reported upon every return with too little basis to confirm. 

I'm curious which researchers would be willing to acknowledge that each instance of activity may be the cause of something else. I'm seeing this subject become a belief system and it's sort of scary. Open minded is being open to changing your mind when new information arises in favor of a likely, alternative possibility that may or may not coincide with your previously conceived notion. Also, I do not find explanation necessary. The need to find cause or reason for every happening, especially when it falls in favor if what you'd really like to be true, seems unrealistic. 

"Something Amazing, I Guess."

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=YuWsa8IJblw

Recently I've been asked by a few different people what my agenda here in the community is. My driving force or goal. I don't really have an answer for them. I try to take a balanced approach and lend at least some critical/constructive thought to the many views and claims being offered. That approach has proven exhausting as of late, but I keep on driving forward. 

I'd like now to reverse the question to all of you. Where does your interest stem from? What is your driving force? What is your goal? What steps are you taking to properly achieve that goal? 

Bigfoot: Believers Only

I was aware groups like this existed. I didn't belong to any because I thought the name was pretty self explanatory. I left this particular group a few months back due to circumstances that I felt were touchy. The first being my non compliance. While skeptical by nature I still enjoy studying the info surrounding the Bigfoot subject. It's fascinating. But I'm not skeptic by definition given by some in the Bigfoot community. Here the word is a bad word and it describes a person who viciously attacks the idea that such a creature could exist and tears down or threatens the belief for innocent believers. That is not my game. In fact I'm just as hungry for info as those who've had a sighting/encounter or just have belief. 

Apparently the follow up to belief is all access pass to this type of group. It's a place where you are made to feel safe in your belief and free to ask questions without fear of backlash from those damn "skeptics". 

Somehow I was added back by mistake. I felt need to immediately post a thank you, but also let the group know I hadn't yet found belief. A few members seemed to think a skeptical view would be welcome so I said I'd hang out but I explained my purpose was not the vicious skeptic type. Then another member stepped in and stated that while I may be a nice person there is already far too much skepticism surrounding the subject, the group is more of a safe haven and perhaps not the place for me. 

I replied that a skeptical stance wasn't meant as a threat to belief and that it's sad that those in a position to gain an understanding or belief through the discussions are being turned away. 

Now, I don't really hold the subject in that high of a regard, it's simply an interest. So, I left on my own...again, as not to appear threatening. But I'm left to wonder what the point of this type group is. Is it to offer protection of belief? And in what way is that beneficial to the subject? I'm not upset, just curious. 

Bigfoot Community

I was ejected from a group today. It was a surprise banning. I appreciated the sentiment but was truly at a loss. I didn't even work a cuss into the conversation I'm assuming I was banned for. In fact, and this was since admitted by an admin them self, I had not broken one of the long list of Bigfoot harmony seeking, belief keeping, authority reaping rules that had been implemented approximately one year ago. So, I was left to wonder which part of my posting and comments had been deemed unacceptable and so downright futile it served as grounds for my removal and banning without any warning. And believe me this group is finely tuned and there is a process in place for hard core Bigfoot rule breakers. I think it goes

Warning, monkey pic, several more warnings, a million complaints to admins that a troll is ruining their belief, removal and finally a permanent ban. I got nothing. Not even a funky monkey. :(

Let's rewind. A few months ago I inquired within the group about their position within the community. Basically I asked if their name "Bigfoot Community" were an overall representation of the whole community and all aspects involved. Several members answered yes and conveyed that the group was pretty much an authority on the subject in all aspects. I left then and allowed them their ideals even though I knew it wasn't a true representation. 

I returned and left a couple more times without really following the flow of traffic within the group. 

Recently there's come an issue with others within the actual community attempting to make a play on the term community for their own Bigfoot groups. Apparently it's not allowed because "Bigfoot Community" group used it first and it will cause confusion among members. 

So again I felt compelled to question what the group felt their position was. Instead of asking I made it a statement. I was adamant about the fact that they were not a representation of the community as a whole. I said that the title belonged to researchers, enthusiasts, investigators, anyone with an interest and it was a falsehood for them to claim their group was the epitome of Bigfooting. (That's a loose quote) I was met with unhappiness, condescension and a ban. Not before making a few more observations like wondering if the group were concerned more with numbers, allowing only popular beliefs among the members, and ultimate authority. 

Yes, I know. It's silly as can be and yes I'm almost as ashamed of myself as you are with me. I'd had never delved so far except I'm a big believer in knowing your place. I'm not asking that you tsk tsk this group or even give this post a second thought. What I'm asking is to check in now and then and make sure new members to the actual community aren't being led to believe that this group is an authority on the subject. 

Disassembling Bigfoot Claims

I enjoy taking things apart and putting them back together. Usually it's a mechanical piece. Lately I've realized the same rules could, and probably should, be applied to Bigfoot claims. I'm sure in essence by delving into a claim we're taking it apart and putting it back together. We do this to learn the inner workings which are, in most cases, a very important part of the investigative process. 

Now, what usually happens when I dismantle a mechanical item is I find important clues and achieve a base knowledge of how and why it works. Then I reassemble the piece and try it out. Sometimes it takes a few tries to put it back together correctly, but with practice I usually restore it to it's original form. Sometimes it doesn't work when I get it back together, sometimes it does. Sometimes it's through fault of my own, sometimes it's not. 

Now that I'm no longer making sense, I'll stop here. I think my point was to disassemble claims, try to figure out the inner workings and see if it can be restored to the fully functioning original.