Re: Respect Your Others: 'Etiquette' in the Field

[Deleted]

...Hi,...I've just finished reading Jeff Meldrum's book: "Sasquatch: Legend meets Science" ...well, they're out there! I'm currently enrolled in British Literature & History & after reading 'Beuwolf', I was struck by the fact that the description of Grendel's 'character' was more animal-like, than 'ghost' or psychological abberation or apparition (non-numinous quality)...this lead me into divergent reading on the Sasquatch & various world myths on 'wild-men'...well, so much for the movie 'Harry & the Henderson's!...I'm now absolutely convinced of the Sasquatch's reality...as I read Jeff's book, a psychic impression occured to me...three strong, distinct impressions came as follows: 1) a delicacy or 'treat' for the Sasquatch are elk-tongues (esp. the females enjoy this) 2) the female's lactate the infant's for approximately 18 months; but can carry their youngster's on their back's for up to 2 to 3 yrs. of age 3) the Sasquatch are deathly terrified of snakes! ...so, always carry a rattler or two with you, when you're out in the field? ...anyways, this very credible, serious topic of a probable concurrent hominoid species, dwelling along-side us in current time,deserves the maturity of intent & focused scientific field-work as applied in other anthropological fields of discovery & endeavour. Attendant to the 'thrill -of -the chase', should always be the 'respect your Other's' attitude, as a healthy reverence for the natural environment & it's occupant's calls forth in you a mature response, through all adventurous enquiry. As this category of comment says...there are certainly rules of 'etiquette' in the bush...as well as a healthy respect for the force's of Nature...so, 'go forth'...but, with courageous, well prepared, mature, polite caution...the First Nations people's have the correct attitude in approach to this phenomenon,...so, again...approach with respect...

[duallie]

???psychic impression?! Snakes, elk tongues, and lactation. Are you sure you were dreaming of sasquatch? It seems more like you're mixing up your dreams.
What are you trying to say in your last few sentences?
So what happened that made you now absolutely convinced?

[Gerry]

Maybe one should not ask.....??

[Richard]

I guess this is the reason this topic is called "speculation" after all ...

Although an old post, if the OP ever does come back: Do you ever get a "psychic impression" from other animals? After all, if you agree with Dr. Meldrum, then you are likely to subscribe to the camp that believes that a Sasquatch is an great ape. One would rationalize that if you get psychic impressions from great apes, then you should from most other primates and/or animals.

R

[duallie]

the OP read a book and became "convinced" of bigfoot's existence.
that alone is silly.
if you've never had a personal experience, there's no way that you have any reason to believe they exist.
all you'd be doing is reading stories and thinking they sound interesting and choose to go along with them.
i've logged countless hours in remote areas looking for sign, and i've still got no clue as to whether or not bf is real.

[Richard]

Feb 24, 2012 16:57:56 GMT -5 duallie said:

a personal experience, there's no way that you have any reason to believe they exist.

Hmm - would you say the same thing about Luxembourgians, or humbolt squid, or Pandas?

Most people have never seen any of the above or had a "personal experience" however we DO believe in film, photos and other people's observations.

After all we sentence people to death on testimony - why should it be any different with testimony to indicate the existence of a large primate??

Richard

[duallie]

we have proof that pandas and squid exist.
how could you even use those as an example.
ufo's would have made more sense.

what i was implying, is that without a "personal" experience, all one is doing is enjoying it through other's stories.

one's own experience would drive them to try to find proof.
reading other's stories just gives someone something to believe in.

[westerncanadian]

Why on earth do people have weird experiences and then try to convince the world that these are facts like this character has done so here. You imagined something and now you act like it is fact. You enrobe it in a pile of pseudoscientific gobbledygook to make it sound plausible, but my friend: it is not. Your imagination is your own universe, but we live in the universe wehere science requires empirical data and psychic impressions are nothing of the sort. That all goes on inside your head.

[Richard]

Feb 25, 2012 0:09:43 GMT -5 duallie said:

we have proof that pandas and squid exist.
how could you even use those as an example.
ufo's would have made more sense.

what i was implying, is that without a "personal" experience, all one is doing is enjoying it through other's stories.

one's own experience would drive them to try to find proof.
reading other's stories just gives someone something to believe in.

I use those as they fit my argument.
Let me re-phrase it for you.

I use a Humbolt Squid or a Panda as I suspect YOU have never seen one face-to-face ... you may not have a personal experience with them. You like many of us, rely on photos, video and 3rd person accounts of seeing them to "prove" they exist.

Why is this any different than Sasquatch?

Sure, the photographic evidence is of lesser quality than that of a panda, however the same logic holds true. One does not need to have a personal experience (witness) of a Sasquatch to be able to ascertain it's existence.

Richard.

[billr]

The difference for many people is that the panda is an undisputed real animal with proof of existence such as live specimens.
This is not the case with sasquatch, there is only evidence that believers consider evidence of existence.
I do not believe in sasquatch because you or anyone else has claimed to have seen one.
I do believe in a pandas existence because of my own concept of what evidence I am exposed to that I will consider proof.
I have not been exposed to any evidence in regards to sasquatch that I would consider proof

[Richard]

So are we just increasing the requirement of proof, and are holding the existence of proof of a Bigfoot to a higher degree of validation than something a bit more mundane. That is perfectly acceptable given the implications.

I still find it quite interesting that people are given the death penalty on a single person's eye witness testimony, yet when similarly credible witnesses report seeing something akin to a Bigfoot people immediately claim that the witness is in error or in fact purporting a hoax.

I agree, it is difficult to prove that Sasquatch exist - I too have yet to see concrete proof, however I believe that there is enough testimony and prints found in remote areas that would indicate something is out there.

After all, all one requires is for ONE sighting to be genuine to prove that there is such a beast.

Hypothetically speaking, if you were driving down the road and saw beyond a doubt what was a Bigfoot - how would you "convince" others like you that what you claimed to have seen was a Bigfoot? Would you rationalize your case on credentials, previous vocations, medical reports on your eyesight? Is there anything that makes you personally a valid witness?

I am not saying this to question you in any way, rather to try to show how difficult it is to convince someone else that what you saw really did happen - and how important it is, given a good amount of investigation, that witness testimony be taken at face value.

Again, I have yet to see concrete proof of a Bigfoot, HOWEVER I do think that enough circumstantial evidence exists to be worth proper scientific scrutiny.

Richard

PS However if you the reader unfortunately fall within the so called "skeptic de-bunker camp" that close their minds to anything they cannot explain, then I feel sorry for you. There are many wonders of this world that we have yet to find, unfortunately so called "scientific skeptics" miss the mark: any true scientist would always question "why" - but NEVER assume they know "how".
To assume anything, yet alone that we have learned all there is to know about our universe is a more absurd premise than the existence of any/all paranormal events as factual.

[billr]

You actually turned my point around 180 degrees.
I require the same level of evidence for the existence of sasquatch.
I have never seen a panda, however I believe they exist because of a number reasons, such as both live and dead species samples in the hands of institutions I trust.
However if a witness reported seeing a panda, Humboldt squid, chimpanzee or elephant running loose in the forests of British Columbia I would not believe it without a high level of evidence.
You may or may not have looked at the same evidence as I have, even assuming we have looked at the same evidence it is quite possible that we reached different conclusions.
For myself I have not seen evidence that convinces me that sasquatch exist

[Richard]

I too have not seen conclusive evidence, however I do firmly believe that something is happening ... and certainly worthy of investigation.

Funny that you should say "institutions that you trust" - what defines this trust, and how far does this trust go?
Meaning that if said institution(s) made a claim that went against your entire belief structure: "Rocks can talk" would that trust still hold?

It may seem a nagging point, but trust is subjective to some other criteria, my question: What is that criteria? If there is none, that simply becomes blind faith.

Richard

[mikemike]

Mar 6, 2012 0:48:25 GMT -5 billr said:

For myself I have not seen evidence that convinces me that sasquatch exist

So let me ask: theoretically if you actually saw one yourself, a clear sighting, firsthand, no question in your own mind about what you saw. Would that itself constitute enough evidence to convince you that sasquatch exist?

[billr]

Depends on the circumstances
If I saw one as clear as day, in such a way that it could not be mistaken identity and I was sure of my mental state.
I could only accept what I saw was real or possibly I was the victim of a hoax
However if I did believe that my sighting was real I would not expect others to believe me