My `What Bigfoot IS - Theories' - In Reply To Lon Strickler's Request

Hello, welcome to Barf Stew (BS) - thanks for visiting or hitting the link. Today's lead post will be a reply to Phantom and Monsters request for Bigfoot Theories http://naturalplane.blogspot.com/2010/07/challenge-to-you-interdimensional.html - and, as you can see at the link - Lon has chosen to go with the `interdimensional being concept' (possibly tainting the comments as the `bigfoot has a reproducing population folks' will probably blow the request  off) - a reasonable concept that I think is growing in popularity do to the lack of a specimen. (I had these takes recently here at BS about Bigfoot a subject I don't like to link to too often - http://barfstew.blogspot.com/2010/06/why-bigfoot-proof-will-not-be-enough.html,http://barfstew.blogspot.com/2010/07/bigfoot-population-exists-in-tiny.html  )

Now, first, I'd like to say that Lon didn't go into detail about what he meant by `interdimensional' being - but - the link I had just a day or two ago had this quote at the website Weird Sciences :alien being could be from higher dimensions. Well, I would like tell UFOlogists that a hyperdimensional entity would never be perceptible to us. Here are some bad words used by paranormal investigators and ufologists:

1.Interdimensional being: well, concept of multiuniverse was presented as solution to Schroedinger’s hypothetical cat paradox. Later devised by Kaluja-Klein and he gave a theoretical possibility of tiny wrapped dimensions. Nothing much than that. Such thing hasn’t been observed(practically evident) yet, it is one of the most favourite term of ufologists. http://weirdsciences.net/2010/07/12/short-article-how-much-ufology-fit-with-science/

Ok, enough of all that BS above (barf stew of course) - Lon's request was for readers theories (and I am an avid reader of Lon's posts). And, as you might expect, if you are a fan of my writings,  on my blog called The Heavy Stuff - the first time I coded for Bigfoot was this post on Oct. 17th, 2007 http://theheavystuff.com/?p=30 a post titled - Tulpas, ZooForms and Orbs - The Connection - at the link are these words from Wikipedia :These are not animals at all, but entities or apparitions which adopt or seem to have (quasi)animal form. This is where we (at least to some extent) enter science fictionterritory. In many ways, these elusive and contentious entities have plagued cryptozoology since its inception, and tend to be dismissed by mainstream science as thoroughly unworthy of consideration. Zooform phenomena seem to be a strange blend of paranormal manifestation and mythology…However, Jonathan Downeswho first coined the term in 1990, maintains that many zooform phenomena result from complex psychosocial and sociological phenomena, and suggests that to classify all such phenomena as “paranormal” in origin is counterproductive…Thoughtform may be understood as a ‘psychospiritual’ complex of energy or consciousness manifested either consciously or unconsciously, by an individual or a group. Thoughtform are understood differently and take on different forms


Now, if you go to the above link - you will also first wade thru a brief description of what I call the Phillips Phenomenology (my personal esoteric idea) which assigns a `group of words' to define what `space' can be and what `time' can be. I won't bog you down at this moment with the details unless I need them later to bring this Bigfoot Theory home (which is probable).

So, `thoughtform' is one of my theories about `bigfoot' (but in the Phillips Phenomenology a thoughtform is simply a `different type of space' with ties to human consciousness - my other bigfoot theories will stand on the same basis).


Then, on Dec. 29th 2007 - I had this link - http://theheavystuff.com/?p=38 - where I first declared:

 "THS’s positioning on Bigfoot’s is that they are `temporary creature/events’. Only this could account for lack of ` a body’ after this length of time and interest. At least that is what `common sense’ says. LOL.




Then here on 3-26-08 -
http://theheavystuff.com/?p=49 at a post called Does `Strange Highness’ Overlap High Strangeness? - I postulated that some `beings' (like the praying mantis beings seen in some chemical states, or people with the DT's feeling and seeing bugs on their skin) might also be a possibility about Bigfoot perceptions - meaning induced by some unique balance of drug/body relationship.


On May 24th 2008 - I said - http://theheavystuff.com/?p=60 "Don’t Bigfoot creatures seem to be in the able-to-not-be?" - Ok, the `able-to-not-be' would have `spaces' that lack a direct anchor to our reality. This is my Phillips Phenomenology.


But, it was on July 11th, 2008 - when I compared Bigfoots and Doppelgangers directly that remains my closest theory as to what a Bigfoot Perception means to a singular observer or multiple observers within the same perceptual field. - It was in this post, while talking of one of Husserl's most important concepts for understanding the Phenomenology we all exist within - the concept called - The Transformation of Ideas Through Temporal Characters* - http://theheavystuff.com/?p=74


(copy and paste)This blog spends many posts talking about `the wonderous’ - including words spent describing such things as the reality experienced during mutual hypnosis between two subjects - and - even - `real subjectivity’ in our talks about the Pilots of Eastern Flight 401; who appeared in the flesh as themselves on flights that included the parts of their failed plane.




As you know, they appeared, as doppelgangers nearly identical to themselves, but `disappeared’ when their `realness’ was forced to confront the common human consensus idea of what was/is possible - after all, that is all that could happen - they were dead.


But, the IDEA of the pilots - the idea they had of themselves - as personally watching over L1011’s (the type of jet they crashed) - was not dead. And, was, in some manner -able to actualize - into a temporal `character’ — character in our meaning - the transformation into a space that `looked like’ the `information’ that represented what the pilots - looked like. Literally.


They were transformed - formed - into - temporal characters (spaces). BUT - as temporal characters - they lacked what we normally consider `solid space’ - which is rooted in a different `area’ of space.


Along the same lines - might other anomalies and paranormal entities fall into the same category. Temporary beings. Temporal characters that represent ideas. Such as the Bigfoot type entities that were reported on the Skinwalker ranch - or - for that matter - any type of Bigfoot or mothman or chupacabra. Could these entities be IDEAS? Could they be ideas that transform into temporal characters - like memes? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meme


Could ghosts be the same thing? Could ghosts be the remaining `idea’ that one has of oneself after ones demise? Could UFO’s be an idea that is transforming into a temporal character? Is it the `temporal nature’ of these `things’ `ideas’ `entities’ that makes an objective `specimen’ impossible?


Could even evolution, consciousness, or intelligence manifest in the same manner? Is everything an idea that shows only its temporal character - is this a description of reality?


Nothing like - The Heavy Stuff.


*(Title stolen from Husserl)


Now, after all that - I'm not sure that others, such as you, a reader of BS,  would not describe what I just wrote and referred to as the same as an `interdimensional being' -- but - interdimensional is NOT what I really am trying to say above.


My belief in a bigfoot theory is much more dry - and perhaps boring. It has to do with how `space' is defined - and what `gives' space the definition it has. And, IMO, it is much more related to how consciousness interacts with the `space perceptual field/structure' available `near' to it -  then with `dimensions' unseen.


Finally, using the words of my Phillips Phenomenology - Bigfoot would be an `entity' who is composed of `space' that is in an opposite `mode' from our common consensus space (that a human would be or a table) - the `space' of the bigfoot would have the `attribute' of `able-to-not-be' (ness) - whereas, normal space - like you and I - are `composed' of space that is defined as `not-able-to-be'.


And, the reason why NO Bigfoots are anything BUT temporary beings - is that their `space' (eventually) `runs off' the ontology of the `normal consensus of space' in a manner that does not permit them to remain. Much like `solid' doppelgangers.


How's that for Barf Stew?

(Exits stage right, not taking questions from the audience.)

http://whatisnotabletonotbeis.blogspot.com/