when will enough be enough?

So for the last 50 years or so the evidence for Bigfoot has been just around the corner. Hundreds of people have got involved, found nothing and given up. Each generation brings a new group of researchers. Currently its the team tazer, bfro, Olympic project, erickson etc.

Technology has changed, methods have changed, theories have got wilder but one thing remains consistent over the generations, still no bigfoot.

So when will enough be enough? Time to call it a day? Even if Bigfoot was the most intelligent creature on the planet it would have to also be the luckiest not to be found.

5 years? 10?

Unchangeable faith of the forest man?

No big foot what?
Dead Body?
Picture?
Captured Bigfoot?

We may have actual photos but the issue is how do we verify it with out saying its a man in a suit?
Look at many they just write it off as a MAN in Suit.
What IF the photo is REAL.
What would make you believe it is real?

BurdenOfProof wrote:"... So when will enough be enough? Time to call it a day? Even if Bigfoot was the most intelligent creature on the planet it would have to also be the luckiest not to be found... "

Two days ago my simple answer would have been "When the money runs out." Now I'm anxious to see the Sykes results.

I know some researchers out there without a profit motive, but IMO, the majority, including Team Tazer, Shawn with this Blog, and now even Meldrum with his hosted expeditions, have something to gain with even the notion of the existence of Sasquatch. Sykes knows first-hand the profit potential of a bestseller and the accompanying paid speaking engagements, which perhaps swayed his decision to take on the DNA studies, particularly in this time of Finding Bigfoot-fueled interest.

The problem is even if the Sykes study comes back stating all samples are of known animals then the believers will be back in the woods filming shadows the next day.

BurdenOfProof wrote:The problem is even if the Sykes study comes back stating all samples are of known animals then the believers will be back in the woods filming shadows the next day.

Right so it comes back with either a proof of known animals. Just like the skeptics the believers will just assume they had a wrong sample.
If it comes back with it being a "homid" they will go back into the woods even more. Then maybe someone will actually fund more research in the area.

When will enough be enough?

When humanity forgets the tales any stories that have turned to myth and legends pass down through generations of indian and tribal populations.

When we stop seeing something out of the corner of our eye that we can not explain...and go looking for an explaination.

When we give up the desire to know everything...to have an explanation for all of existance.

Enough will be enough when we quit being human.

BurdenOfProof wrote:The problem is even if the Sykes study comes back stating all samples are of known animals then the believers will be back in the woods filming shadows the next day.

And honestly why is that a problem?

DPinkerton wrote:When will enough be enough?

When humanity forgets the tales any stories that have turned to myth and legends pass down through generations of indian and tribal populations.

When we stop seeing something out of the corner of our eye that we can not explain...and go looking for an explaination.

When we give up the desire to know everything...to have an explanation for all of existance.

Enough will be enough when we quit being human.

You are right up there with religious fundamentalists who seem to have a warped view that science is close minded. That is simply ignorance due to science not taking your wild beliefs seriously. Real science and exploration based on solid foundations is fascinating and incredible ie the search for the higgs boson or the exploration of mars using incredible technology. Hunting for a mythical magic monkey man does not come in the same category.

BurdenOfProof wrote:

DPinkerton wrote:When will enough be enough?

When humanity forgets the tales any stories that have turned to myth and legends pass down through generations of indian and tribal populations.

When we stop seeing something out of the corner of our eye that we can not explain...and go looking for an explaination.

When we give up the desire to know everything...to have an explanation for all of existance.

Enough will be enough when we quit being human.

You are right up there with religious fundamentalists who seem to have a warped view that science is close minded. That is simply ignorance due to science not taking your wild beliefs seriously. Real science and exploration based on solid foundations is fascinating and incredible ie the search for the higgs boson or the exploration of mars using incredible technology. Hunting for a mythical magic monkey man does not come in the same category.

Oh here we go again about what is real science!
Higgs Boson particle was just as mysterious as BIGFOOT just happens that PEOPLE spend a lot more MONEY to look for the particle than they do bigfoot. ALSO they aren't even sure that they found it. How many years and how much money was spent looking for the particle?
Again they are looking for specifically looking for something that they SAY MUST be present. So how is this any freaking different than the search for big foot. Only way we can see this particle is the after affects. So please stop using the freaking REAL SCIENCE angle. I can't SEE the particle but yea you tell me its their so it must be because see the math and physics says something is their causing this.

I get so annoyed when people jump on the BIGFOOT is not real SCIENCE.
Give it a freaking rest.
They 2 sciences are not the same! one is dealing with a creature the other is dealing with a freaking particle.
Particles don't think.

BurdenOfProof wrote:You are right up there with religious fundamentalists who seem to have a warped view that science is close minded. That is simply ignorance due to science not taking your wild beliefs seriously. Real science and exploration based on solid foundations is fascinating and incredible ie the search for the higgs boson or the exploration of mars using incredible technology. Hunting for a mythical magic monkey man does not come in the same category.

First..I take great exception at this characterization! You have compared me to a religious fundimentalist and ignorant. You have characterized my beliefs and assumed I have no understanding of "true" science.

You asked a question..."When will enough be enough". I have stated what I feel to be a very true answer based on my perception of human nature. I made no statement of my personal belief in the issue.

You are correct..."Real Science" is facinating. The search of mars and our outer planets facinates me, someone who spends their majority of TV viewing time on the Science or History Channels. Real science takes commitment, dedication AND a huge expense. The so named "Footers" clearly have commitment and dedication...so far they are lacking in funding and the mechanisms to do "true" research. Some are trying, some are fanatical, some are believers no matter what.

I feel that the "fanatics" in every group do little to support the overall effort and often are more detrimental to the cause. That seems to clearly be the case with Bigfoot. Fanatics, hoaxes, misinterpritations all contribute negatively on anyone trying to perform "real science".

So what is my take on it? There is enough question out there to warrant the continued search for diffinitive proof. I just which that could come with the full support of the "scientific community". Till there is, I will hold judgement and look at what is presented.

Burden, you are one of my fave posters. But the answer to your question is it will never be enough. We will come and go, and others will take our place. How much further will researchers take it is the bigger question.

When there is
a specimen
a description
a name.

That is all that is required to list a previously undiscovered species. So far we haven't really got any one of those three.

If BF exists would people really want it proved beyond doubt? What about the human need for mystery and to look into the deep,dark forest and wonder what is out there??

Virgil_Caine wrote:When there is
a specimen
a description : I think we have several Descriptions.
a name. I think we have several names

That is all that is required to list a previously undiscovered species. So far we haven't really got any one of those three.

If BF exists would people really want it proved beyond doubt? What about the human need for mystery and to look into the deep,dark forest and wonder what is out there??

a description : I think we have several Descriptions.
Question is are Sasquatches as varied as Humans are in Appearance? I think they are.
So some can be dark skin and fur, red hair, blonde, white, grey, light skinned very hairy less hairy. Tall or short.
a name. I think we have several names Well several names I guess eventually science will have to pick one.
of course would it be as broad as lets say a Human being

you answer your own point. 'Several descriptions' is the whole point. There are not several taxonomic descriptions of known creatures.

Presupposing this mythic creature is varied presupposes it exists so that doesn't work.

Just doing some homework on the varied descriptions would be a major undertaking. I am prepared to beleive it is possible a large undiscovered primate may be linving in PNW USA, but many different species...no, that's too much given the numbers required to sustain genetic health.

For me those 3 things are what is required and I agree there is a debate about how far we have got in any one of the 3 areas.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bili_ape

"The apes nest on the ground like gorillas, but they have a diet and features characteristic of chimpanzees", according to a National Geographic report.[2] While preliminary genetic testing with non-nuclear DNA indicates a close relationship with the eastern chimpanzee Pan troglodytes schweinfurthii subspecies of the common chimpanzee,[3][4][5][6] a range of behaviors that are more closely related to those of gorillas have greatly intrigued primatologists from around the globe. Though their taxonomic classification has been clarified, the need for further information about these chimpanzees persists.

Virgil_Caine wrote:When there is
a specimen
a description
a name.

That is all that is required to list a previously undiscovered species. So far we haven't really got any one of those three.

If BF exists would people really want it proved beyond doubt? What about the human need for mystery and to look into the deep,dark forest and wonder what is out there??

If that happened tomorrow, I would still be heading out to the forest this weekend and every other weekend after that. Pinkerton stated my view in his concise post above.

Imagine if Sykes DNA study had the same samples as Ketchum and Sykes came back and said all samples were of known animals. Now if Ketchum was still saying "the results are beautiful and coming soon" would the believers still drink the koolaid?

I would hope that would put this myth to bed.

BurdenOfProof wrote:Imagine if Sykes DNA study had the same samples as Ketchum and Sykes came back and said all samples were of known animals. Now if Ketchum was still saying "the results are beautiful and coming soon" would the believers still drink the koolaid?

I would hope that would put this myth to bed.

Lack of evidence is NOT proof against. It would NOT change the perception that there is some unexplained "creature" in the remote parts of North America and around the world. The reality is that as long as there is something unexplained, humanity will continue to search for the answer. Interesting you call it "drinking the koolaid" but no one questions "legitimate" scientist on spending millions and constructing massive equipment to search for an elusive sub-atomic particle.

"drinking the koolaid" is an expression used by someone who clearly has no desire for a reasonable and logical discussion and review of suspected evidence.

Not at all!

I will discuss the evidence happily, but as to date there is none.

If a DNA paper is released to a Scientific Journal I will embrace that and discuss it.

If a body / bones / fossil is found I will do the same.

Still waiting, as are you and everyone else, because up to now noone has the evidence.

Enough will be enough when there is a confirmed body - dead or alive.

Until then, there is no bigfoot.

Just some cool folklore, if you're into that sort of thing.

Got Yeti Yet? wrote:Enough will be enough when there is a confirmed body - dead or alive.

Until then, there is no bigfoot.

Just some cool folklore, if you're into that sort of thing.

And the earth was flat, until someone proved it. Gorillas were mythical creatures, until someone proved it. The list goes on and on.
You have every right to think there is no Bigfoot. It appears to be an open & shut case for you. I on the other hand think there is no reason why Bigfoot cannot exist. Bears hibernate during winter, so this cuts down on competition during the lean months. Wolves, coyotes and other predators often leave remains behind. I'm sure Bigfoot would be opportunistic if a situation presented itself.
There is plenty of fresh water, plenty of seclusion and plenty of cover in forested areas where I live.
To say there is no Bigfoot seems a bit hasty to me.

I also agree that we as humans tend to persume things till we have some person discover something and changes are view.
Look at the Huge Chimp that was discovered... how long did it hide from basic science?

DPinkerton wrote:

BurdenOfProof wrote:The problem is even if the Sykes study comes back stating all samples are of known animals then the believers will be back in the woods filming shadows the next day.

And honestly why is that a problem?

I was hoping to see your answer to this one, Burden. To each his own, as I see it.

I guess there is no problem but it will just drag on and on leaving the believers susceptible to being hoaxed again and again

BurdenOfProof wrote:I guess there is no problem but it will just drag on and on leaving the believers susceptible to being hoaxed again and again

Then your job of stating "hoax" is secure.