No announcement yet.

Bigfoot sightings? (serious question)

  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #61
    I have a great story very long and it involves secret fishing spots so I'm gonna have to keep it a secret 😄. I can tell you this all incounters were at 2 different lakes maybe 13miles apart by plane 60min by car and 1825 foot in elevation.
    Seen something walking at a good clip in 40 to 50" of snow effortlessly. We had a tuff time In snow shoes. We were driving home frome ice fishing deep down dirt road. 15 inches on the road on the way out when we saw huge figure walking in the woods no cars or people for 40 miles. Buddy couldn't stop because his wife was pissed home with the kids. She eventually left him. Then another time fishing alon with my dog I would hear a loud single nock every so often from different areas on the mountain sides. I was kinda freaked out. UT wasn't leaving till dark. Just before I was packing up my tipups I heard something screaming insane like getting something getting killed and it was the way I had to go on the way out. I hiked in a mile or so to ice fish here. So I eventually had to cross the lake and hit the trail back to my truck with my dog. Akita. And halfway down the trail was massive amounts of blood for about 30 foot . I wouldn't let my dog stiff anything and shook like a leaf all the way to the truck threw the ice sled with 125 # of gear in like nothing turned the key and floored it. The next summer we went fishing in the boat and there is a rod and gun club having a benefit lunch at the boat launch and as we are launching the boat they said if we want we can join them. We brought or own food and beer 🍺 and I wanted to get fishing 3 hour drive from my house and making just a day trip because the fish ing was good. We bought some cookies and brownies to be nice and a woman from the club said that thre has been several sasquatch sightings that summer. Crazy


    • #62
      Ah, the Bigfoot mystery lives on. Could the truth be stranger than fiction? Or vice versa?

      Dr. Matt Johnson has written two excellent books on the topic of Bigfoot. Once I started reading it was compelling to say the least. Though "far-out" these books made a believer out of me. They are the most logical and sensible books on this topic. I have both books. "Team Squatchin is where I found them. (On Facebook"). Many people mock or make fun of others who have the courage to share their experiences and that is understandable for anything that "shakes" their emotional security is usually scoffed at out of "self-preservation" motives. I felt much the same way until I experienced events involving this "mythical" creature. I soon found it was no myth. Read the books and have an open mind. There are lots of "creatures" and entities out there which challenge our current belief systems.
      Last edited by Schultzz; 11-28-2021, 07:51 PM.
      Never Argue With An Idiot. They Will Drag You Down To Their Level And Beat You With Experience.


      • #63
        I would recommend "Where the Footprints End," by Joshua Cutchin and Timothy Renner. They make the case that bigfoot sightings are essentially in the tradition of fairy, elf, lake monster sightings, etc. This frame of analysis borrows from the works of Carl Jung and Jacques Vallee in the 1960s, who came to this same conclusion about UFOs. This explanation for bigfoot and UFOs offers an explanation for why "believers" can never please "skeptics" by showing them a body or a crashed saucer--we are trying to understand mostly metaphysical phenomenon as literal hominids/apes, or literal spaceships.

        This is not to say that these things, including bigfoot, are not "real." Read Patrick Harpur's "Daimonic Realities." In western culture, we have become obsessed with the idea that everything can and must be explained by science in order to be "real." We believe, as Terrence McKenna put it, something isn't real "unless you can bang on it with a hammer." Other cultures, particularly traditional cultures, don't share this delusion of a purely materialistic reality, and their ideas of reality permit a broader understanding of what is real, including the existence of paranormal, quasi-physical beings like bigfoot.

        In my mind you don't have to be a believer or a skeptic, both make the same mistake of trying to understand our world in purely material, scientific terms. You just have to open your mind and expand your understanding of reality a bit.

        Suggested reading:

        "Where the Footprints End," vol 1 & 2, by Joshua Cutchin and Timothy Renner
        "Flying Saucers: A Modern Myth of Things Seen in the Sky," by Carl Jung
        "Passport to Magonia: On UFOs, Folklore, and Parallel Worlds," by Jacques Vallee
        "Daimonic Reality: A Field Guide to the Otherworld," by Patrick Harpur


        • #64
          So if I take a hit of LSD and see a fairy, it's real?

          I think what you need to question is what our perception of reality is. It's been done a million times, but it's really at the root of this problem.


          • #65
            Actually that is a great question, and an open question, whether you can consider that fairy "real." Our reflexive, western, scientific minds would scoff and say "of course not." Yet many cultures would regard that fairy as falling within their accepted "reality." And your point about perception is important too. What many of these writers are addressing is that our subjective perception should be the true gauge of what is real, and that our quest for some scientific, objective understanding of reality is futile. If you're truly interested in contemplating these questions I would recommend some of the works of Terrence McKenna, his studies of shamanism and the use of psychoactive substances are fascinating.


            • #66
              Right - most people would say you're "crazy". Or it's the drugs.

              The science tends to say it's that. Meaning that you don't even need the drugs to go out of touch with "reality". When we look at it from that standpoint we're just biological machines with a pre-programmed sense of "reality" that can easily be confused.

              Mystics have always looked at it as something beyond. Proving that it's "real" is fairly difficult, but people have very real experiences in this sense, so it may be no less real to them.

              There's also weird instances of people "hallucinating" the same things, that is to say they are logically consistent within a group. Further study tends to show that's a false reality in itself and people are very subject to the power of suggestion. If you aren't paying attention, it's very easy for you mind to go back and fill in whatever you want it to.
              Last edited by montcalm; 12-09-2021, 10:27 AM.


              • #67
                Great points. And I would go one step further--it may be that the concept of "reality" isn't very useful at all. The fact that people remain convinced of having seen things that are impossible as far as science or even popular consensus is concerned, might suggest we should abandon notions of "reality" altogether.

                That's not to say we should abandon reason, or science--these tools help us organize society and develop technology that enhances our lives. But approaching some of these phenomena with a western paradigm of right/wrong, real/unreal, is fruitless. The fact is, as these bigfoot threads demonstrate, a segment of the population has seen something--whether "right" or "wrong"--that has challenged their sense of reality. The rest of us call them "crazy" or "mistaken," their experiences "impossible." And so the cycle repeats itself as we argue on the internet endlessly.

                However, if we accept that there is no objective reality then we can enjoy these stories (and if we're lucky, experience these things first-hand) as what they really are: folklore, or, to the experiencer, an interaction with the sublime otherworld that lies beyond our understanding. The same transformation in understanding would benefit experiencers. Rather than spending time trying to pass "bigfoot conservation laws" (seriously, these are REAL), or running around the woods banging sticks on trees and looking for hair or stool samples that they can test in a lab, experiencers could better spend their time pondering that sublime otherworld and it's effect on their lives. And, like traditional cultures might, we can draw inspiration from these stories that will enrich our lives, rather than trying to prove or disprove them using a framework (science) that is not suited to the task.
                Last edited by SacandagaSchout; 12-09-2021, 10:53 AM.


                • #68
                  I think reality is still a good concept. It's the concept that we build our sciences around. In fact it goes to show reality has so much beyond our limited senses. The fact that we can repeatably measure, manipulate and somewhat predict it, puts it in the realm of the real.

                  If you want to think about those kind of tangents, think about our society and its constructs. How real are they?

                  And hopefully I won't ruffle any feathers here, but it's just to too good a parallel to not put out there, but the Bible is full of this dichotomy. Is it based on actual historical events or is it legend?

                  The answer is as far as we can tell: both. The fact that it's done so in this way makes it all the more difficult to untangle reality and the spiritual and makes the stories more meaningful. The same sort of things were done in non-western civilizations with supernatural doings perhaps superimposed on natural cycles or events.

                  Other than those ramblings, I really do believe people have extraordinary events take place in their lives that we can't explain, that may have some scientific reality. There's really a lot we don't know and every time we look at something more in depth, we find something that we weren't expecting.
                  Last edited by montcalm; 12-09-2021, 04:14 PM.


                  • #69
                    It is comforting to see things in black or white, and that is what "reality' tries to achieve. Some believe that gray rules the day, which is uncomfortable but thought provoking. Splash a little color in there along the way adds spice to life, methinks.
                    "A culture is no better than its woods." W.H. Auden


                    • #70
                      Quantum reality is grey. Chaotic systems are grey.

                      Reality is not reductionist. Reality is not static. Reality is not deterministic.

                      All those things are simplifications to help our limited brains process the real world and make crude predictions. But the future is chaos, by action and thus by definition. It's what we don't know, and can't precisely know (why do you think we invented statistics?).

                      That's reality. It's scary, it's unknown, it's unpredictable.


                      • #71
                        So really, what is reality? It only becomes reality when you begin to believe in it. If you believe in Christianity or any other religion, it becomes part of your present reality when you believe it is real and you fit it into your life. People with dementia have their own reality. People who are "brainwashed" have their own reality. reasonable explanation helps us rationalize our reality on different levels. Is seeing believing? Do we need to "see" to believe? We can have experiences and accept them as part of our reality without actually "seeing". Some of us can see without visual acuity. Some people have skills or spiritual gifts which stimulate senses without using their eyes. Does that negate their reality or yours? One of the first steps I had to take is to assimilate the fact that we are not the only creatures in the universe. My own belief is that God, (as I understand Him) made lots of beings. To refuse to accept that doesn't make you a bad person but it makes a strong case for selective narcissism and limits our capabilities to think outside of the lines.

                        I believe "bigfoot" (which is a misnomer term), came here from another planet. (And not from a space ship). I believe it has been on this earth for longer than humans. I believe there are two main species of this creature. One is a sentient creature with God given capabilities which far exceed that of humans. The other species does NOT have these abilities. Let's find a handle to differentiate these two so we can understand the differences. The sentient beings we'll call, Xanue. The other species without special abilities we'll call Treykon. This will make it easier to follow my "theory".

                        The Xanue were permitted to settle here because their sun was burning out and God gave them permission to travel here through a portal. This time period was before the Dinasaur era.

                        Let's suggest the Treykon were brought here by an alien population in a "flying saucer" to be a labor force for their captors to mine for a mineral which the captors needed. When the captor species finished their mining they no longer needed the Treykon and left them here on earth. Timewise, this was after the dinosaur period, but before the humans were created.

                        In the Garden of Eden with the Xanue were present but did NOT participate in the "fall" of mankind. Whether as a result of what happened with Adam and Eve, or whether they had special abilities before they arrived on earth they retain these special abilities to this day. These abilities include "cloaking" and being able to read minds of humans other unusual abilities which involve "shapeshifting" into any creature they wish, and an ability to manipulate molecules to heal humans and other animals, with permission of God. One more thing, these beings firmly believe in the triune God so we could call them "Christians". If your still reading this you may be interested in chapter two which can follow if enough are interested. It's okay to express your disbelief or other feeling through emojis or whatever floats your boat. Just tell me if you would like to hear more or not.
                        Never Argue With An Idiot. They Will Drag You Down To Their Level And Beat You With Experience.


                        • #72
                          Very interesting, Schultzz. As a firm believer that there is much that is unknown and more that is unknowable, I can't dismiss anything out of hand. But I am curious what the basis is for this information. Where does this information come from?


                          • #73
                            So if I know that if drive my car off a bridge into the river, that is real and (if I survive or not) it has real long term consequences that can be measured and documented then and forever after with actual evidence of the facts. However if I wake up from a dream while sleeping in which I saw myself drive off a bridge into the river, it surely felt "real" to me at the moment and i may even be shaking in my bed and sweating after I wake up. I can even swear that it was "real" to anyone who would listen. Maybe I could even fabricate the story, but it woiuld still be a story with any "facts" that I decide to embeliish it with. But in no way can I or anyone else who I tell the story to, believe that It can be considered that story as "reality" in any manner. There would be no tangeable or lasting evidence from the dream.
                            Last edited by Wldrns; 12-15-2021, 03:23 PM.
                            "Now I see the secret of making the best person, it is to grow in the open air and to eat and sleep with the earth." -Walt Whitman


                            • #74
                              The only difference between a story and a credible theory is a logical presentation of evidence.


                              • #75
                                Re: the unknown and the unknowable.

                                I really tend to question why people care so much about something like "bigfoot". What purposes does it serve? What do you get out of it, or rather what does society get out of it? It just seems like a silly diversion from real problems, when I look at it objectively.

                                WTBS, I don't mean to be mean about it, but think about it. We're at an absolute point of either greatly succeeding as a society or failing miserably and heading back to a dark age, or worse. The existence of a mythical creature is not going to fix any of those issues.

                                I tend to be a pessimist personally, but I try to be optimistic about these things and hope that human ingenuity and perseverance will overcome. But the fact of the matter is there are real, big issues with our long term sustainability. First and foremost is having the sense to cull our population before it becomes our demise. I feel like every crisis in nature is trying to show us this, but we don't listen. We constantly wreck ecosystems and have the effects of unchecked population (of another species) stare us right in the face, but we look right past it. Only to be distracted by some other story which has zero real world consequence or viability in being solvable.

                                Beyond that, we've been facing an energy crisis for almost 50 years now, to which we have absolutely no viable options to sustain. Is "bigfoot" going to fix this for us?

                                And even if that doesn't tickle your fancy, and you want something a little more intangible and ethereal, there's the matter of modern physics and "dark" energy and matter, which is on the brink of breaking everything we know to be true. We're on a the edge of discovery there far greater than what Newton or Einstein bridged for us in the past. A cold slap in the face that despite how far we've come, the universe will not give up her secrets to us so easily. And this is one, that if solved, will go down as one of the greatest discoveries of humankind, ever.

                                This is where we stand. And I left out a bunch. But just thinking of those heavy hitters I can't see how anyone can be bothered to muck about with something which has so little evidence to support and so little to gain if proven one way or another.

                                That's all...