Author: Ally
Sunday, 08 December 2002 - 02:43 pm |        |
When Ray Wallace died last month his family decided to come clean and admit that he had faked the Bigfoot legend by hoaxing the footprints and arranging the famous video footage. Now I don't know about you, but my opinion is that they should have let it go to the grave with him. I wanted to become a cryptozoologist when I was 8 so's I could prove Bigfoot and Nessie were real and there was still some part of me that was waiting to chuck off the responsibilites of adulthood and go hiking in the backwood to find the sasquatch. And while any half-rational idiot knows that the Bigfoot thing was faked, there's a difference between knowing it and *knowing it*. They killed the magic dammit.
Just a little pissy rant I wanted to make.
Thank you. |
Author: Dan Norder
Sunday, 08 December 2002 - 07:42 pm | |
Ally,
Honestly, the Bigfoot phenomena has gone way beyond the first set of prints Wallace created. Prints and sighting appear everywhere, and the current Bigfoot afficianados haven't seemed bothered by this news at all.
I think it's similar to the people who admitted to making some of if not the first crop circles, or the people admitting the famous fairy photos were faked, or spiritualists who admit that they rapped on the tables themselves. People who want to believe will ignore them, those who were inclined to not believe can use those admissions as another reference in making a judgment.
I don't think Bigfoot is dead. In fact, in a few months the general public won't remember this announcement. That's just my prediction anyway.
Dan
---------------------------------------------------------------
Consider supporting this great site by making a donation. See: http://www.casebook.org/about_the_casebook/funding.html
--------------------------------------------------------------- |
Author: Ally
Sunday, 08 December 2002 - 07:48 pm | |
Yeah.. I know but I still want to whack them upside the head anyway. 
Nice sig by the way,
Ally |
Author: Vila
Monday, 09 December 2002 - 08:29 am | |
Ally,
You don't have to whack anyone...
As I recall, there are bigfoot reports dating from the 1800s.
Vila |
Author: Ky
Monday, 09 December 2002 - 10:51 am | |
Hi Ally,
You are as always correct! I hate it when someone spoils a perfectly fun mystery!
Ky |
Author: Monty
Monday, 09 December 2002 - 11:11 am | |
Folks,
So let this Limey get it straight....
.....that huge F@*k off car with the big tyres that crushes those regular saloons and jumps into puddles of mud whilst being cheered on by a load of rednecks didnt exist ??
Damn you Wallace....damn you to hell !!!!
Monty Simpson
 |
Author: Garry Ross
Monday, 09 December 2002 - 11:33 am | |
Evening all,
They tried to kill Nessie a few years back too and now I'm hearing rumours about Santa...
why won't they let it lie?
take care
Garry
who even at my age will be listening out for hooves on roof...knowing my luck it'll be 'Spring Heeled Jack' on a comeback. |
Author: Kevin Braun
Monday, 09 December 2002 - 12:18 pm | |
The Bigfoot legend is not dead.
"For the first time, scientists from many disciplines will put the most compelling sasquatch evidence under the microscope and apply forensic science to the on-going mystery. Their conclusions will shed new light as to whether we have a living, breathing North American ape living in our forests. Evidence collected by the BFRO, including the Skookum Cast, will be featured. This cutting edge 1-hour 35mm film documentary is a co-production by Doug Hajicek of Whitewolf Entertainment Inc., The Discovery Channel, and Bosch Media.
The documentary has been scheduled to air sometime in January, 2003. For premier air dates and times, you can contact The Discovery Channel:"
Here is a link to the Skookum Cast.
Take care,
Kevin |
Author: Dan Norder
Monday, 09 December 2002 - 04:09 pm | |
Vila,
The reports that modern Bigfoot believers say came from the 1800s are either complete fabrications or horribly twisted, misinterpreted references to encounters with bears or fairy tales about large humans that were not covered with fur. Similarly, references to Native American legends have also focused on figures that don't look or act anything like the modern Bigfoot creature(s) but can be edited and slanted to try to invent a historical basis for a modern legend.
Ky,
There plenty enough real mysteries out there that people shouldn't waste their times on ridiculous hoaxes.
Garry,
Springheeled Jack seems to have been running around India for the last couple of years wearing a monkey suit and scratching people's faces. I don't think he's working for Santa now. That'd be a definite career jump -- but then he's pretty good at jumping, so who knows.
Kevin,
Everytime those people say they are going to use modern evidence to prove anything, they drag out known Bigfoot supporters to pretend to be neutral scientists convinced by the "evidence" -- often from a field other than their normal discipline -- and ignore any truly objective mind, let alone the skeptics who could debunk them. The Discovery Channel lets them do this because the Bigfoot shows are popular, as long as nobody is allowed to look at them critically and spoil their fun (profits).
Dan
---------------------------------------------------------------
Consider supporting this great site by making a donation. See: http://www.casebook.org/about_the_casebook/funding.html
--------------------------------------------------------------- |
Author: Tom Thacker
Monday, 09 December 2002 - 08:13 pm | |
Dan,
I'm not sure what you mean by 'neutral' scientists(an ideal perhaps, but all scientists 'believe' something), but several anthropologists are currently studying Bigfoot and similar creatures. For example, the documentary that will be airing on Discovery next year includes an anthropologist who specializes in biomechanics. At the university where I work (a very large research institution), at least 2 anthro profs (one of them is also a molecular geneticist) study similar animals in Asia.
As for the Discovery Channel, they've been balanced in their Bigfoot docs. They've even aired one that tried to debunk it, although very badly(apparently the filmmakers weren't very 'neutral' on the issue).
I find it fascinating that when Wallace passed away, nobody questioned if he or his family were telling the truth and just accepted it as fact. Apparently the burden of proof is much less for skeptics. |
Author: Dan Norder
Monday, 09 December 2002 - 09:17 pm | |
See, Ally? If Tom is any indication, the pro-Bigfoot people will continue to believe whatever they want regardless of how silly or nonsensical.
Dan
---------------------------------------------------------------
Consider supporting this great site by making a donation. See: http://www.casebook.org/about_the_casebook/funding.html
--------------------------------------------------------------- |
Author: Tom Thacker
Monday, 09 December 2002 - 11:14 pm | |
Dan,
I am neither believer nor non-believer. As someone with a background in anthropology, I find Bigfoot to be of some interest. Does Bigfoot exist? I don't know. But I know enough to realize that such a creature is possible and therefore worthy of some investigation.
To you, my previous post seemed pro-Bigfoot, but it was actually anti-skeptic. I lump skeptics in with those you call believers. Both groups have blinders on. One group believes everything, the other nothing. My approach is in the middle, what's usually referred to as Fortean. The idea is to explain things rather than explain them away. Its by far the most intellectually satisfying(and intellectually honest) way to go. |
Author: judith stock
Tuesday, 10 December 2002 - 12:41 am | |
Dear Tom,
And there are those like me, who believe that Nessie and Bigfoot are drawing from the case of the Dodo, and staying as far away from humans as is possible! Do you blame them?
I would also bet that you don't believe in the Sooty/Howdy Doody theory?
AND, by the by..does anyone else listen to the Car Guys on NPR on Saturday mornings? "Cause they told a reeeeeaaally awful joke on their last show and I can't help giggling when I think of it. Post if you wanna hear it....
Cheers to all, including nay-sayers and doomsday believers,
J |
Author: Dan Norder
Tuesday, 10 December 2002 - 12:49 am | |
Sorry, Skeptics do believe in things, but only those things that make sense. People who call themselves Forteans, from my experience, tend to be true-believers who just don't go for the truly psychopathic theories (Bigfoot as alien visitor) but fall for the weird nonsensical ones (Bigfoot as still-living missing link). The fact that they are actively anti-Skeptic and anti-science shows their true colors.
I'm sorry, but it's not intellectually honest to think a large, unsubstantiated primate species can be wandering around the United States. Nor is it honest by any stretch of the imagination to say that the Discovery Channel has been balanced in their documentaries regarding the Bigfoot phenomena. "Balance" does not mean "let's take a 30 second clip from what one skeptic says and surround it by 59 minutes of total B.S."
Dan
---------------------------------------------------------------
Consider supporting this great site by making a donation. See:
http://www.casebook.org/about_the_casebook/funding.html
--------------------------------------------------------------- |
Author: Ky
Tuesday, 10 December 2002 - 02:36 am | |
Dan,
Lighten-up dude! some 'mysteries' are just for fun! Now if you'll excuse me I must go and feed the elves that live under my willow tree.
Ky |
Author: Paul Carpenter
Tuesday, 10 December 2002 - 06:53 am | |
Hmmmm.... Dan, I think most 'Forteans' that I know consider reality as a whole to be something of a continuum running from black to white - not merely back and white.
Whether such things are 'real' in the strict physical sense isn't really an issue to people of this persuasion. Why these things are seen and believed is of just as much interest to a true 'Fortean' as whether or not the visitation actually happened.
Certainly, there are enough Bigfoot reports that closely parallel other 'phenonema' to warrant comparisons to so-called 'alien' visitations, ghosts and Nessie.
"Skeptics" have a tendancy to roundly denounce pretty much everything that cannot be empirically determined as bunkum. But there is interesting and important human information here. Don't think so? Tell it to the people who dedicate their lives - often at the expense of their family, friends, and health - to track down god knows what imagined creature of the outback. Tell it to the millions of pilgrims to Lourdes. Tell it, even, to those who cleave to the belief that Prince Eddy was JtR.
These things if anything are more 'real' to most people than superstring theory or dark matter.
And since when does science have a definitive answer for anything anyway? Plato's sphere's of the heavens were supplanted by Newton's model of the universe. He in turn was supplanted by Einstein. In time, Einstein will fall or be modified. Today's cutting edge science is merely tomorrow's amusing 'What our ancestors believed' documentary
"I can conceive of nothing, in religion, science or philosophy, that is more than the proper thing to wear, for a while."
- Charles Fort |
Author: Kevin Braun
Tuesday, 10 December 2002 - 10:03 am | |
Dan,
You sound 100% certain, absolutely sure, Case Closed.
The mountain gorilla and the giant panda were both only legends for many years before their existence was proven. The coelacanth was flatly considered extinct for millions of years, until one was found off the coast of South Africa in 1938.
It is hard to ignore so many witness and all the grainy films. I am not saying I think large unsubstantiated primates and large unknown animals in freshwater lakes, exit. I don't know. If I had to put odds on it, I'd go 70%-30% against. I find it difficult to be certain about anything.
Take care,
Kevin |
Author: Garry Ross
Tuesday, 10 December 2002 - 11:51 am | |
Hello all,
On the 'Nessie' front, I've pitched myself Lochside...well I've been watching the cams they have...and earlier today I could've sworn I saw a seagull flying by!!
Anyone that wants to have a peek at the cams (it's dark there just now though) can do so here:-
LochNesscams
wear something warm.
take care
Garry |
Author: Stewart P Evans
Tuesday, 10 December 2002 - 05:51 pm | |
| Any truth in the rumour that Cornwell's next book is about the Loch Ness monster and that she's going to pay for the loch to be drained? |
Author: Dan Norder
Tuesday, 10 December 2002 - 06:48 pm | |
Paul,
Skeptics just think extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence, not a bunch of proven hoaxes and wild stories. That goes for the Prince Eddy as Jack the Ripper and the Lourdes pilgrims too.
Kevin,
The problem with citing mountain gorillas and giant pandas and so forth as a rationale for why Bigfoot exists is that those creatures were in largely unexplored wilderness, and the coelacanth was found in deep water. That's completely different than the concept that a 7 - 9 foot tall monkeyman is wandering around northern California, Texas, Minnesota, and other states. It's like looking for Nessie in your bathtub.
Stewart,
Hey now, there's an idea that Cornwell might have luck with.
Dan
---------------------------------------------------------------
Consider supporting this great site by making a donation. See:
http://www.casebook.org/about_the_casebook/funding.html
--------------------------------------------------------------- |
Author: Garry Ross
Tuesday, 10 December 2002 - 08:45 pm | |
Stewart,
heh heh, don't give her any ideas.
It could be an interesting story if Nessie was implicated in the murders with the help of a young male salmon.
It'd throw new light on the 'Dear Boss' letters, are they actually signed 'Jack the Kipper' or is that just a red herring?
*groans aplenty*
take care
Garry |
Author: Christopher T George
Wednesday, 11 December 2002 - 04:47 pm | |
Garry!
You may be onto something. I don't know whether you know that in Lewis Carroll's diary for 1891 he mentions that Dr. Dabbs of the Isle of Wight, Lord Tennyson's attending physician, apparently had a theory that the murders were committed by a somnambulist (sleepwalker). So in other words, your mention of "Jack the Kipper" may be on the money, if we grant that a British dialect word for "sleep" is "kip."
Best regards
Chris 
Is it time to open the presents yet? |
