Bigfoot/Sasquatch/Forest People in Tennessee

#326
#326
lawgator1 said:
Assumed from thread title this was regarding UT sororities.

I am disappoint.
Click to expand...

So let me get this straight - you are a Florida lawyer and this is an example of the quality of your correspondence?

You must be really disappoint at Will Muschamp. In fact, disappoint at the Gator's sororities, disappoint at the Gator offense. Just completely disappoint.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#327
#327
hndog609 said:
With respect the first observation is that nothing you cite here even remotely addresses what I stated in my post. There is an undeniably vast chasm between the huge amount of anecdotal evidence vs literally ANY scientifically validated evidence of Bigfoot.

I'm not sure what the name dropping is supposed to accomplish. This is especially true if the Dr Ketchum you're citing is Melba Ketchum. I'd actually try to avoid using her to corroborate my beliefs. (but that's your call obviously)

I'm not trying to convince you of anything either (the post of mine you cite wasn't even directed at you) unless it's that, for the rest of us, the concerns as to how and why we've gotten this far with such an enormous inverse relationship between anecdotal evidence and real evidence are valid. As I type this I'm not aware of literally anything scientifically validated confirming, or even strongly supporting, the existence of Bigfoot. That the darn things are supposedly darn near everywhere (including people's backyards munching blueberry bagels I believe it's said) and we've still got zip, zilch, nada to show for it in regards to scientifically vetted evidence...well, it makes skepticism pretty easy to come by.

I've said it before and I'll say it again...I HOPE you're right as it'd make the world more interesting.
Click to expand...

Chocolate chip pancakes - and the world is more interesting - because these people do exist. It isn't my fault that you are not aware. I am not a scientist, nor do I want to be. Someone that I am working with spent this past weekend watching one of these guys for 10 minutes. His wife was with him and all she could say was Holy ****, Holy ****. I know of at least three college professors who have spent the majority of their spare time researching this field. If there is no compelling evidence why don't they take up knitting or golf. I will be the first to say that there is nothing to it - if that is what I find; but I continue to find just the opposite. I am also actually working on an improved platform for viewing pictures and agree that blob squatches on facebook don't make for a compelling argument in favor of their existence.
 
#328
#328
Fullfillmer said:
Chocolate chip pancakes - and the world is more interesting - because these people do exist. It isn't my fault that you are not aware. I am not a scientist, nor do I want to be. Someone that I am working with spent this past weekend watching one of these guys for 10 minutes. His wife was with him and all she could say was Holy ****, Holy ****. I know of at least three college professors who have spent the majority of their spare time researching this field. If there is no compelling evidence why don't they take up knitting or golf. I will be the first to say that there is nothing to it - if that is what I find; but I continue to find just the opposite. I am also actually working on an improved platform for viewing pictures and agree that blob squatches on facebook don't make for a compelling argument in favor of their existence.
Click to expand...

So, again, can you give us (I'm not remotely the only person with these kinds of questions) ANY insight (go ahead and speculate, it's all you've got anyway so unless you go nuts on us speculation is fine) as to just how in the hell there's THAT much anecdotal evidence yet literally no scientifically viable evidence? We've got high quality live footage of giant squid from over 2000' down (nevermind tons of dead specimens) in the ocean (where we have incredibly finite access) and yet simply nothing to show for a giant hominid that is supposedly running around all over the place and being "seen" all the time. (Claims of small population and elusiveness actually flatly contradict the number and distribution of sightings) It's the anti-"where there's smoke there's fire" argument, a wildfire's worth of smoke yet not even a good solid ember to show for it.

Forget trying to convince me or anyone what's real and what isn't. For myself there's little reason to believe in something without some substantiation that holds up under scrutiny. Don't sweat that part. I am very much curious on why you think there IS so much anecdotal evidence but such a total dearth definitive evidence.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#329
#329
Fullfillmer said:
Chocolate chip pancakes - and the world is more interesting - because these people do exist. It isn't my fault that you are not aware. I am not a scientist, nor do I want to be. Someone that I am working with spent this past weekend watching one of these guys for 10 minutes. His wife was with him and all she could say was Holy ****, Holy ****. I know of at least three college professors who have spent the majority of their spare time researching this field. If there is no compelling evidence why don't they take up knitting or golf. I will be the first to say that there is nothing to it - if that is what I find; but I continue to find just the opposite. I am also actually working on an improved platform for viewing pictures and agree that blob squatches on facebook don't make for a compelling argument in favor of their existence.
Click to expand...

So they go looking for imaginary creatures with no sort of camera to film it?

Also what colleges are the professors from. I'm sure nobody wants their kids going there.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#330
#330
govols/cc said:
So they go looking for imaginary creatures with no sort of camera to film it?

Also what colleges are the professors from. I'm sure nobody wants their kids going there.
Click to expand...

A Full Professor of Anatomy and Anthropology and a Professor of the Department of Anthropology at Idaho State University. The others are professors at Georgia and Texas A & M respectively. You have made my point, they don't think they are looking for anything imaginary so ask yourself - how long should it take them to dismiss this and move on.
 
#331
#331
Fullfillmer said:
A Full Professor of Anatomy and Anthropology and a Professor of the Department of Anthropology at Idaho State University. The others are professors at Georgia and Texas A & M respectively. You have made my point, they don't think they are looking for anything imaginary so ask yourself - how long should it take them to dismiss this and move on.
Click to expand...


So they "study" something that doesn't exist yet when they see "it" they take no pics, no video, or gather any other evidence. Sounds like top notch "scientific" stuff.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#332
#332
hndog609 said:
So, again, can you give us (I'm not remotely the only person with these kinds of questions) ANY insight (go ahead and speculate, it's all you've got anyway so unless you go nuts on us speculation is fine) as to just how in the hell there's THAT much anecdotal evidence yet literally no scientifically viable evidence? We've got high quality live footage of giant squid from over 2000' down (nevermind tons of dead specimens) in the ocean (where we have incredibly finite access) and yet simply nothing to show for a giant hominid that is supposedly running around all over the place and being "seen" all the time. (Claims of small population and elusiveness actually flatly contradict the number and distribution of sightings) It's the anti-"where there's smoke there's fire" argument, a wildfire's worth of smoke yet not even a good solid ember to show for it.

Forget trying to convince me or anyone what's real and what isn't. For myself there's little reason to believe in something without some substantiation that holds up under scrutiny. Don't sweat that part. I am very much curious on why you think there IS so much anecdotal evidence but such a total dearth definitive evidence.
Click to expand...

I really don't need to speculate because I know. In all candor with every example, you not only make your own case - but provide support for mine. 5 years ago you could have just as easily been asking me for proof of a giant squid, because 5 years ago there was no high quality live footage. In 1990 there wasn't evidence of a lot of things that have subsequently proven to be true. When I started this post, I specifically said I am not interested in getting derailed by people who are interested in getting into a pis$ing contest or interested in relaying the latest joke about bigfoot.

Since I have a strong preference that people think these are imaginary beings, I am going to defer to you and support your position. You may move along as clearly my request of recent sightings does not pertain to you, nor do I have any interest in sharing with you my experiences or what I and others know.

As a reminder: If you have not had a recent sighting or if you are not aware of a habitat site - this post does not apply to you. If you are aware of either of these events in East Tennessee or in the surrounding states please let me know.

Thanks,
 
#333
#333
Fullfillmer said:
I really don't need to speculate because I know. In all candor with every example, you not only make your own case - but provide support for mine. 5 years ago you could have just as easily been asking me for proof of a giant squid, because 5 years ago there was no high quality live footage. In 1990 there wasn't evidence of a lot of things that have subsequently proven to be true. When I started this post, I specifically said I am not interested in getting derailed by people who are interested in getting into a pis$ing contest or interested in relaying the latest joke about bigfoot.

Since I have a strong preference that people think these are imaginary beings, I am going to defer to you and support your position. You may move along as clearly my request of recent sightings does not pertain to you, nor do I have any interest in sharing with you my experiences or what I and others know.

As a reminder: If you have not had a recent sighting or if you are not aware of a habitat site - this post does not apply to you. If you are aware of either of these events in East Tennessee or in the surrounding states please let me know.

Thanks,
Click to expand...

Again, there's been dead giant squid found that live an area far larger than North America. There is concrete evidence of a creature that lives in a much more remote area than some phantom creature getting hand fed in Cade's Cove.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#334
#334
govols/cc said:
Again, there's been dead giant squid found that live an area far larger than North America. There is concrete evidence of a creature that lives in a much more remote area than some phantom creature getting hand fed in Cade's Cove.
Click to expand...

So - feel free to go study giant squids. Sounds like this doesn't apply to you.
 
#336
#336
Fullfillmer said:
I really don't need to speculate because I know. In all candor with every example, you not only make your own case - but provide support for mine. 5 years ago you could have just as easily been asking me for proof of a giant squid, because 5 years ago there was no high quality live footage. In 1990 there wasn't evidence of a lot of things that have subsequently proven to be true. When I started this post, I specifically said I am not interested in getting derailed by people who are interested in getting into a pis$ing contest or interested in relaying the latest joke about bigfoot.

Since I have a strong preference that people think these are imaginary beings, I am going to defer to you and support your position. You may move along as clearly my request of recent sightings does not pertain to you, nor do I have any interest in sharing with you my experiences or what I and others know.

As a reminder: If you have not had a recent sighting or if you are not aware of a habitat site - this post does not apply to you. If you are aware of either of these events in East Tennessee or in the surrounding states please let me know.

Thanks,
Click to expand...

Oh come on now...this is as bad as the Panda episode from earlier in the thread that I've actually tried to forget and move forward. It's literally using "arguing from ignorance" as substantiation. It's beyond silly to try to draw an analogy that having one thing discovered is somehow directly supportive of discovering something else. That's an epic logical fallacy. You aren't still waiting for phlogiston or luminiferous aether to be found true, are you? Besides, how did you so badly miss that "discovering" squid had nothing to do with the point being made? (We've had observable specimens beached back to at least the 1800's) We can get footage of something practically no human has ever even had the ability, much less the opportunity, to see alive but not conclusive evidence of a Bigfoot. We have absolute, definitive proof (of all kinds) of something found thousands of feet down in the ocean depths but can't substantiate a giant hominid that it's claimed can be fed blueberry bagels in Michigan. That's not some small issue.

If you carefully look at my postings while I am undoubtedly a skeptic (with good reason at this point I believe) I haven't really seen fit to cast derision. In fact I've repeatedly stated it would delight me to have the existence of Bigfoot verified. My question was a simple one, at least contextually. You may have a fairly complicated answer but that's fine. There's no possible way to deny the gap between anecdotal evidence and "real" scientifically vetted evidence. I've even stated (so I'll do so again) this doesn't necessarily preclude the existence of Bigfoot but it darn sure makes for a big question; why all the smoke and no fire? If Bigfoot is real then there HAS to be an explanation.

Theories?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#337
#337
hndog609 said:
Oh come on now...this is as bad as the Panda episode from earlier in the thread that I've actually tried to forget and move forward. It's literally using "arguing from ignorance" as substantiation. It's beyond silly to try to draw an analogy that having one thing discovered is somehow directly supportive of discovering something else. That's an epic logical fallacy. You aren't still waiting for phlogiston or luminiferous aether to be found true, are you? Besides, how did you so badly miss that "discovering" squid had nothing to do with the point being made? (We've had observable specimens beached back to at least the 1800's) We can get footage of something practically no human has ever even had the ability, much less the opportunity, to see alive but not conclusive evidence of a Bigfoot. We have absolute, definitive proof (of all kinds) of something found thousands of feet down in the ocean depths but can't substantiate a giant hominid that it's claimed can be fed blueberry bagels in Michigan. That's not some small issue.

If you carefully look at my postings while I am undoubtedly a skeptic (with good reason at this point I believe) I haven't really seen fit to cast derision. In fact I've repeatedly stated it would delight me to have the existence of Bigfoot verified. My question was a simple one, at least contextually. You may have a fairly complicated answer but that's fine. There's no possible way to deny the gap between anecdotal evidence and "real" scientifically vetted evidence. I've even stated (so I'll do so again) this doesn't necessarily preclude the existence of Bigfoot but it darn sure makes for a big question; why all the smoke and no fire? If Bigfoot is real then there HAS to be an explanation.

Theories?
Click to expand...

I guess it would start with someone watching the Patterson Gimli film and starting with a hey there is a 50/50 chance that there is something to this - or there is a 50/50 chance this is a elaborate fake. If you are predisposed to disproving everything and approach it - thinking that there is a 100 % chance this is a fake, no amount of proof or convincing will change your opinion. I started at 50/50. There is plenty of fire - you are just not aware of it. If I were you 1 1/2 years ago - I would be asking the same questions and reaching the same conclusions. I had nothing to support that these people exist. Now I do. I feel that I have gone about my research in a logical fashion and will continue to do so. I should point out that I completely disagree with 95 % of the people that believe that the forest people exist as most approach it as fashion similar to what is portrayed on TV. I have already indicated that I support your position - and that I hope everyone holds a similar position.

For those unfortunate souls who have had a run in - with one of these fictitious, imaginary beings in East Tennessee or the surrounding states please let me know.

Thanks,
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#338
#338
I have never seen one but would be open to the experience. I think on both sides of the argument there are numerous issues to be examined. We can say because There is no physical logical or scientific information at this point that they Therefore Do Not exist . On the other side are those who see a Bigfoot behind every tree every time the wind blows. I welcome good, honest and complete scientific research into the subject.....most of which is either faked or foolish yet there are a few honest researchers and I wish them well. As for the OP I do not know his background of expertise but wish him well I'm his endevor
 
#339
#339
Fullfillmer said:
There is plenty of fire - you are just not aware of it. If I were you 1 1/2 years ago - I would be asking the same questions and reaching the same conclusions.
Click to expand...

Not to seem like I'm goading you but if true then where is it? By this I mean why isn't it common knowledge? In all seriousness, Holy Hell, anthropologists would look like girls at an Elvis concert upon seeing a specimen, even an incomplete one. Fame and fortune would surely follow anyone that could provide definitive proof. It would be a big, BIG deal. Surely you agree this would be the case. Even less conclusive evidence that still passed peer review would be major news. (Fossil evidence for instance wouldn't have to be conclusive but quality examples that held up under scientific scrutiny would generate profound interest)

Maybe there IS more out there that's just on the DL...I'm just trying to understand why (and to some extent, in this day and age, even how) that would be the case. There just looks to be far more upside to proving Bigfoot is real than some more esoteric approach, at least in my view.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#340
#340
Fullfillmer said:
I guess it would start with someone watching the Patterson Gimli film and starting with a hey there is a 50/50 chance that there is something to this - or there is a 50/50 chance this is a elaborate fake. If you are predisposed to disproving everything and approach it - thinking that there is a 100 % chance this is a fake, no amount of proof or convincing will change your opinion. I started at 50/50. There is plenty of fire - you are just not aware of it. If I were you 1 1/2 years ago - I would be asking the same questions and reaching the same conclusions. I had nothing to support that these people exist. Now I do. I feel that I have gone about my research in a logical fashion and will continue to do so. I should point out that I completely disagree with 95 % of the people that believe that the forest people exist as most approach it as fashion similar to what is portrayed on TV. I have already indicated that I support your position - and that I hope everyone holds a similar position.

For those unfortunate souls who have had a run in - with one of these fictitious, imaginary beings in East Tennessee or the surrounding states please let me know.

Thanks,
Click to expand...

Can you elaborate on this statement? What do you mean "95%?" Also why do you refer to them as "forest people?" Is that a term you came up with on your own? I've never heard anyone else use that term when referring to sasquatches. Are you saying that you think they're a form of human beings and not animals?
 
Last edited:
#341
#341
As you can see by my avatar I'm a believer. It took about 2 years research to come to my conclusion. I read through thousands of cases of sightings. That's what blew me away, the way the animals were described from all over the continent . People report Bigfoot families with small children. sasquatches come in different colors red, white, brown, black, and gray. There have been thousands of foot prints cast that have dermal ridges ( they came from a real animal). They have a cast they found from one location that was matched as the same footprint to one cast on a mountain top 600 miles away a year before. If you really want to learn about this elusive animal research BFRO has a large sightings index and thousands of reports. Another one that even Bigfoot people don't know about is jerkylawnflowersandbigfoot ( Google it). Remember you don't have to see to believe.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#342
#342
Brave Volunteer said:
Can you elaborate on this statement? What do you mean "95%?" Also why do you refer to them as "forest people?" Is that a term you came up with on your own? I've never heard anyone else use that term when referring to sasquatches. Are you saying that you think they're a form of human beings and not animals?
Click to expand...

This is my q he hasn't answered . Are there actual Sasquatch as we imagine them to be or just forest people .

I'm confused.
 
#344
#344
I've seen sasquatch practicing kicking a football.

sasquatch-football-o.gif
 
#345
#345
Why ask for help from people if you aren't willing to help in return by educating us as to what you "know to be true"? I really don't understand the elusiveness. If you don't want people asking questions, never bring the subject up on a mb. Otherwise take the time and have the patience to answer questions.

Honestly, the way you dodge questions in no way inspires me to try and be helpful in return. It makes this thread kind of pointless IMO.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 people
#348
#348
Fullfillmer said:
I am a field researcher for the E.T. Chapter of the BFRO and would like to track down hot spots ( sighting or habitats) primarily in E. Tennessee. Spare me the jokes as I have heard them all - but if you are aware of a recent sighting or a "busy" location please let me know.

Thanks,
Click to expand...

I've not read all the post,as you can imagine why,I would like to honestly know what your proof is ? or why you think there around ?
 
#349
#349
Weezer said:
Why ask for help from people if you aren't willing to help in return by educating us as to what you "know to be true"? I really don't understand the elusiveness. If you don't want people asking questions, never bring the subject up on a mb. Otherwise take the time and have the patience to answer questions.

Honestly, the way you dodge questions in no way inspires me to try and be helpful in return. It makes this thread kind of pointless IMO.
Click to expand...

Exactly. Dude answer zero questions.

It's time to put up or gtfo.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#350
#350
Fullfillmer said:
I am a field researcher for the E.T. Chapter of the BFRO and would like to track down hot spots ( sighting or habitats) primarily in E. Tennessee. Spare me the jokes as I have heard them all - but if you are aware of a recent sighting or a "busy" location please let me know.

Thanks,
Click to expand...

Well as a teacher I have heard about Bean Station being a good area. I had one student who swore he was seeing one in the tree line behind his house he even started leaving food for it. With lake and river access I think Grainger county would be a good place to look. Hint: the Poor Valley area at night.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top