oldrover said:
What browser do you use? It’s usually just a question of one click.
Firefox is my browser.
oldrover said:
I’ve looked at that forum it is quite big, would you be able to link to some examples that you find particularly impressive? I would be genuinely interested.
Computer-fool that I am: this kind of direct-linking is beyond my abilities. Can give "sub-forum and page" for a few IMO fairly choice examples.
BigfootForums -- sub-forum "General Bigfoot Discussion". Relevant pages of said sub-forum, cited below:
P4: thread, "A 'scientific' approach to Bigfoot?"
P5: thread, "Louisiana Bigfoot Expedition"
P6: thread, "Do skeptics happily and blatantly declare 'knowers' as outright liars and frauds?"*
(*Not a "turns-away-wrath" sort of title -- on the whole, this thread could have got nastier than it did.)
P11: thread, "Questions for Dr. Meldrum".
As very often in life, the belligerent characters are in the minority -- most folk are reasonably laid-back and not super-ready to quarrel; but, "the old, old story..."
oldrover wrote, first quoting me saying "I'd respectfully ask, re the just-above -- why is 'the coincidence of the timing' a necessaily deal-breaking problem? The whole business is so extremely odd -- to the point that IMO little would seem too odd to consider..."
Replying to me,
oldrover said:
Major point there I’d say, and one which goes off in two directions at once. Firstly I do believe that the increase in sightings post 1950’s is significant, further that the amount they’ve increased by means that something has fundamentally changed since that time. As you suggest there are two main explanations; mine, and that there is a paranormal phenomena reacting to or influencing human culture. I admit there’s no way to say that your position is wrong, and contrary to the impression I might give I’m very strictly not inherently against it. It’s just that I can’t see it as the most likely explanation in this case. To me anyway there seems to be very clear media trail.
The second and admittedly far loser point is whether like me you think that there is a connection between Sasquatch and the man beasts from the rest of the world, if so then either way what stands for the Sasquatch must also stand for them. Of course I’m not asking you to accept that means what I think it does.
I think that on this particular piece of the puzzle, you and I are probably at “agree to differ” point. I know that “paranormal entities might be – and might do – absolutely anything” can be thought a too glib all-purpose answer; and I have spells of being brought up short and wondering, “am I being ridiculously credulous and superstitious?”. Overall, though: just too many reports, from people whom I cannot but respect, of their seeing – occasionally, more than just seeing -- these things, for the “only in people’s minds” line not to seem, to me, more preposterous than my “anything’s possible in paranormal-land” one. As ever, “just my humble...”, and “your mileage may...”.
I pretty much concur with you: what goes for Sasquatch goes, I think, for the great majority of man-beasts worldwide. I can see the Orang Pendek as quite likely a fully-flesh-and-blood species; and feel that the jury may, just possibly, be out, concerning some things heard from the remotest reaches of the former Soviet Union (not the Caucasus and its Almas, which topic we have chewed over plentifully on this sub-forum in recent years). Otherwise -- MHBs are reported from some places where they COULD be around as fully-flesh-and-blood species today, in biological /environmental / planet-historical terms (parts of the Americas, parts of Asia, maybe Africa); and some where most would agree that they couldn’t (Oceania, most parts of Europe). The sticking-point re the former category is, for me, “if the things are purely-flesh-and-blood, why are they seemingly never killed / caught / found dead / clearly photographed?”