Comments on: Bush Phantoms: Carter Farm Revisited

By: Redrose999

Redrose999 — Tue, 22 Nov 2011 17:30:10 +0000

The entire thing is suspect. I think it is either a hoax by a very clever person, clever enough to convince some folks (and if Biscardi is involved, it reeks hoax) or the delusions of a very mentally ill woman, who believes everything she says enough to convince hopeful researchers it’s real.

By: AreWeThereYeti

AreWeThereYeti — Tue, 22 Nov 2011 07:47:58 +0000

@ sasquatch: my sentiments exactly. Somebody – anybody(!) – please tell Steve how to post his damned pictures so we can get a look at ‘em.

Look, we’ve already hashed-out “seeing is believing.” In response I say, “NOT seeing (the alleged pics) is UN-believable!”

Thank you and good night.

By: Vane

Vane — Tue, 22 Nov 2011 03:07:42 +0000

All this seems quite suspect. For one if I had 6-9 feet tall bipedal ape men on property for 50 years i would have an entire library of superb quality photo and video evidence. And i’m almost positive that if you leave food outside, 9 times out of ten it gets eaten. and not necessarily by sasquatch. I’ve heard similar stories in the past. “Somtimes Bigfoot comes to my back door and asks for garlic and sugar” – Random old History or Discovery Channel Documentary. It just doesnt seem right. IF they do exist, then they obviously do whatever they can to avoid human contact and stay in remote areas. But who knows… maybe they like to play on school buses.

By: MidnightWalker

MidnightWalker — Tue, 22 Nov 2011 00:53:01 +0000

You guys just don’t get it. You can look at numerous “habituation” sites that BFRO or other parties took over only to get no results. The sasquatch PEOPLE will entertain who they want. They’re not there for you to exploit them and they’ll read you like a book if you try. Don’t know that? Well then why haven’t you gotten your precious evidence in the woods much less someone’s property. If you had come to my property, they would have treated you like the plague most probably, unless you had like-minded approaches towards them. If you’re just out there to snap a pic, then good luck. Don’t buy my story then argue with my audio and the folks that know me. People that haven’t had them on their property or in a frequent encounter situation will never understand. It takes a long time to earn the trust and you have to be the right type of person.

By: sasquatch

sasquatch — Tue, 22 Nov 2011 00:50:59 +0000

Someone tell Steve how to post his pictures! I’d see them.

By: DWA

DWA — Mon, 21 Nov 2011 20:56:04 +0000

Bottom line:

A “habituation scenario” yielding nothing that would interest a scientist is a waste of time to even discuss.

By: Jerry D. Coleman

Jerry D. Coleman — Mon, 21 Nov 2011 20:54:32 +0000

Carter Farm: Gee-whiz somebody got their feathers ruffled. Too many take such an unscientific approach. Right out of the box with, limits on divulging information, then quickly on to simply slandering people because their argument is unable to stand alone. Typical methods used to appear to gain ground. But in the end what we still have is no Bigfoot. Personally I would be so ashamed of myself if all that research time and effort to find a family of Bigfoot, on a few acres, brought forth no absolute, conclusive, proof.

By: steve abney

steve abney — Mon, 21 Nov 2011 20:50:26 +0000

Like I said, tell me how to post some of my pictures and see if you want to tear them down, first thing is seeing is believing, well lets look at that statement for a moment, as a researcher that researches the evidence and not to prove they exist, it’s some thing personal and perhaps private, you see if I try to prove they exist, then people will want to know where, why, when and ect, and that puts the forest beings in harm, I try to use a little common sense in what I do, the next statement, using the goodall approach, let’s look at her record, hhmmmm not bad at all, so lets go with it,

By: SC Enthusiast

SC Enthusiast — Mon, 21 Nov 2011 19:48:41 +0000

Cass of MPLS:

Yes, if we look at the general statement “See if believing”, we can definitely come up with examples where the eyes can fail.

I agree one could look at the sun and “see” it move around the earth. I agree one could look at Criss Angel and “see” him walk on water. Your point is well made.

Of course, how many of us would truly “believe” these events? I would speculate very few. Still, you could probably come up with additional examples less silly than the ones you used.

So you have proven that the general statement “seeing is believing” is not true.

However, applied to a particular event, you haven’t really proven anything. Much of what we “know” comes from our “seeing.”

I can’t speak about other people’s experience, but mine was in broad daylight and about 20 yards away. It was not for a matter of seconds but a matter of many minutes.

I think a better dispute to my case would be along the lines of mis-identification. That or the lack of evidence that proves my case, which of course I don’t have. Another good argument may be that I am just lying or looking for attention. That’s a good one. How can one defend against these arguments?

Well you can’t of course..

In my case, I believe I was close enough to make a proper identification. I would have been close enough to distiguish a squirrel from a chipmunk, or a dog from a fox. That is my view. There are very few creatures in the forest of the size I observed.

My point was simply it is not a religious belief. Religion has absolutely nothing to do with my conclusion. I don’t simply believe they exist. I believe they exist based upon visual confirmation.

By: Sharon Lee

Sharon Lee — Mon, 21 Nov 2011 18:41:20 +0000

DEVIL’S ADVOCATE WARNING!

SC Enthusiast asks: “Why would a researcher invest 3000 dollars to feed unseen creatures? Why would a researcher claim to use the Jane Goodall approach without having subjects to study?”

Let’s say the humans involved are poor, perhaps unemployed and could use $3,000 worth of groceries from a generous researcher…and the Jane Goodall approach would work on humans too.