If you’re just joining us, please familiarize yourself with the earlier posts in this series so you’re reading this within the context it was intended. :)
Part One: Out on a limb
Part Two: The Science of Intuition
Part Three: What is NVCODE?
Part Four: “Warren”
Part Five: Pheromones or “ESP”?
Part Six: Sasquatch, Lust and Pheremone Chips
Part Seven: The latest science…
Part Eight: Infrasound
Much of the general public doesn’t believe in bigfoot. Thanks to a lack of education about the subject, media sensationalism and tongue-in-cheek reporting, many Americans are still under the assumption that there’s just one. As if it’s the Easter Bunny or Santa Claus. It’s a great, big, hairy joke.
As a result, bigfoot encounters are vastly unreported due to fear of ridicule. For every Bigfoot sighting that does get reported, there are likely dozens, if not hundreds or thousands, that do not.
Bigfoot researchers grumble about the fact that the public has misconceptions about Bigfoot. They implore witnesses to come forward, to share their stories with them, despite the risk of ridicule.
But ironically, I think that exchanges such as the ones I’m going to be sharing with you usually go unreported TO RESEARCHERS. It’s bad enough to confess that you saw a big hairy thing which supposedly does not exist. Mention that you had non-verbal conversation or communication with it, and watch the incredulity factor soar. A perfectly credible witness suddenly becomes a not-so credible one. An excited, engaged researcher’s eyes begin to glaze over if a witnesses mentions the words telepathy and Bigfoot in the same sentence voluntarily. And, believe me, the vast majority of researchers DO NOT ASK the witness… because they don’t want to hear the answer.
Bigfoot and telepathy. Don’t ask – don’t tell.
I find this ironic simply because the very researchers who implore witnesses to come forth and share their stories will then turn and ridicule those whose stories don’t match the preconceived notions that the researchers hold. Don’t believe it? Visit a public bigfoot forum and type in the words “bigfoot” and “telepathy”.
You’ll find responses like these when witnesses share their encounters, or when those who are open-minded to the idea say so.
“Sure there’s telepathy going on, you can’t hear it? She’s saying “Oooh don’t stop big boy…” and he’s saying “Who’s your daddy?”
“I will then warn all the boojums with my telepathy to eat their powdered rocks and hide from the Cryptozoological Capitalists!!!!!”
“The man believes some sasquatches possess paranormal powers under certain conditions, which completely invalidates any position he holds. :rolleyes: I stopped reading the article at that point. He’s a loon – just like Mary.“
“Did XXXXXX suggest these animals are using telepathy to speak to one another???… Not only that, but did he and the other guest actually agree with the crazy woman… that Bigfoot have been telepathically contacting humans and giving them “messages”??? …Gawwwwwwwwwd… Why do the people they always interview make us look like raving IDIOTS???!…”
Nice. Heck of a way to reassure a witness that you’re a serious investigator who’s able to stuff your biases and simply gather anecdotal evidence. Do you honestly think that a witness, visiting that forum, will want to speak up about their experiences and subject themselves to that type of ridicule? From self-proclaimed “researchers”?
The difference is, I ask. I always have. I can’t tell you how many times I have personally asked a witness, particularly long-term ones, this question: “Is there anything else strange that’s happened that you feel reluctant to tell me?”
The reaction is usually the same. Eyes downcast, they almost appear ashamed . A moment of silence occurs as they weight their comfort level with me, consider my reaction… and then, more often than not, they spill the beans. “I wasn’t going to mention this, because it’ll sound crazy…” Then they go on to tell me something I’ve heard dozens of times before. And when I smile and reassure them that what they said didn’t surprise me, it’s as if a huge weight has been lifted from their shoulders. The floodgates, at that point, open and I am the pleased recipient of their trust… and the WHOLE story.
Interestingly, years ago when I applied to investigate reports for Oregon for the BFRO and gained access to FLATS, I noticed that any reports that mentioned anything smacking of telepathy got dumped into a particular bin and disregarded.
No one else seemed to notice how many reports were in that bin.
It’s easy, I suppose, to dismiss data when you believe it to be irrelevant because it doesn’t fit your bias.
It’s also the anti-thesis of the empirical process.
Lynda Kennedy in the summer of 1984 went tent camping near Mt. Hood for a week. She isn’t sure, but thinks it was around Zigzag, OR. Feeling grubby after several days of camping she went to the shallow creek to take a bath in a small pool. The sun had set and the last of the light was about gone about 8:30 when she felt something watching her. Glancing up, she saw a silhouette in the twilight, crouched down with its hands in the water, like it was washing them.
A typical Bigfoot encounter, right? She was in a remote, wooded area. She felt watched, and saw something that thousands of other people have reported seeing. But let’s look at the rest of the story.
“It looked up, and I saw her and she saw me. At first I was afraid it was a bear, and my glasses were off. All of a sudden I heard in my head, almost like somebody was saying it, ‘I’m not gonna hurt you…and you’re not gonna hurt me.” Reaching for her nearby glasses to get a better look, when she turned back it had ran off into the bushes. Lynda said it was dark brown with 4 1/2 inch hair all over. She didn’t see anything in its hands, it was just ‘cleaning itself…washing her hands.’ Asked again about the “message,” Lynda said, the “answer was in my mind…gonna go our separate ways.”
http://www.oregonbigfoot.com/report_detail.php?id=82 (report taken by Ray Crowe and originally published in Track Record #11)
Is Lynda any “crazier” or any more of a “liar” than any other witness who claims to see a bigfoot while camping? Will we discount Lynda’s account of her sighting simply because she mentioned receiving a clear communication? Most incidental (as opposed to long-term) encounters don’t include these kind of details. But how many witnesses are asked… or are willing to relate them if they do happen?
If you’re reading this report with a critical or experienced eye, you’ll notice that by Lynda’s account, the figure was silhouetted and her glasses were off, so she could not see it clearly. Yet Lynda refers to the bigfoot as a female. Many researchers would automatically begin picking the available details of this story apart, using this apparent discrepancy to discredit the witness and thereby “further” invalidate the account. I suspect that they would do so because the witness claimed non-verbal communication. Other researchers would not even bother with this account at all. It would end up in The Bin.
Had I been the one to take the report, I would have asked her why she thought the creature was female. And I would have listened to her answer, expecting it to be one of two things: Either obvious secondary sexual characteristics like breasts were visible even with her glasses off… or it was simply a “sense” she got when the creature communicated with her that impressed upon her enough to naturally refer to the bigfoot as a female when discussing her encounter.
Neither answer would surprise me.
Incidentally, the researcher who did take the report – Ray Crowe – made it a habit to publish every report he received and left it up to the readers to “keep their skepticals on”. He’s one of the few researchers I know who does not censor or suppress eyewitness accounts that don’t agree with mainstream bigfoot ideology. Kudos to Ray.
More to come…
