Why `Bigfoot Proof' Will Not Be Enough!

The endless news cycles that the MSM trots thru - endlessly - means that consumers of the material (that's you and me) - eventually form a point of view about most of it. IE: Missing Children who's parents are suspects are evidently hot topics everyone wants to know about (and feel that they are at least better than them); Uplifting statements about the full economic recovery stated by the government are not to be challenged directly by `news' readers or with their facial expressions (how can they read this drivel without cracking up); The `summer fires' in the Western United States are something everyone wants to see daily in the summer (do they really get new footage or just re-use the same footage) ; and on and on and on.

As a diversion, and, usually in the summer months - (during the slow news time of year) - the media turns to what is reported nearly daily in the `paranormal internet news sites' -- that being, `Ghost' stories, UFO reports and even the occasional super snicker story (between the `news' readers - as part of the `fun banter' public-relations relationship the on-air hosts have for the public to feel close to them) `Bigfoot' sightings.

Indeed, as part of their `in-depth' - all sides of the story facade - the MSM will usually pony up some Bigfoot `expert' (often one who leads groups into the woods in search of Bigfoots) who will talk about the `evidence' such as the Patterson Film, castings of footprints, -- and direct sightings of all kinds and natures. And, as you know, seldom does the `reporter' ask anything resembling a hard question such as -  `why no specimens or scat' -`where are the bones' (BTW, a google of bear bones will find that bear bones do get found in the woods, caves, etc) - `what is the local breeding population' - `never one roadkill - anywhere'.

So, really, because no serious questions are ever asked - it's all treated as a `fun' thing by the media - kind of a pompous one-up over the probable redneck who spends his nights in the woods tapping on wood; often, nowadays, toting much scientific gear to provide the `proof' of just one creature of the breeding population in the local area.

And, indeed, if you search the internet for video and stories - you will find `heat images' of Bigfoots - even videos of the heat images. You will also find the occasional `trail cam' that captures a `sliver' of an unknown entity - sometimes even looking like a `Bigfoot'. And, you will find in your search online (easier than all that woods trekking) `sounds' of Bigfoot and many many first person accounts of sightings of a Bigfoot that eventually ------ in all cases -------- leaves their field of perception.

Temporal entities. Temporal spaces in our common reality consensus.

So, lets just Barf Stew up, right now,  the `perfect Bigfoot Sighting' - a Smoking Gun type of case. Ok, --- first, we'd have to have it on multiple video cameras operating at the same time and at least one of the cameras would be one with infra-red capability. Additionally, the sighting would be at a short distance (say under 50 yards) - it would be seen visually by multiple people in the party if not everyone. The `Bigfoot' would remain in sight for an extended period and would `signal back' to the `searchers' AND vocalize `for sound captures' of the creature.

Then, after the creature simply walked out of view and range of the recording instruments and searchers -- the searchers would be able to retrieve `direct evidence' from the site - INCLUDING a tuff of hair for DNA analysis (casts of the footprints etc) - indeed, even a fingernail would be found. And,  all the `hard evidence', when the results came back `from the lab' showed it to be an `unknown' mammal - even with clearly different results than ever seen. And, all the hard evidence, would then be re-confirmed by other top notch facilities.

Now the question, would all the evidence above - be proof enough for you? Proof that a live population of Bigfoots are in certain areas of our country and indeed - throughout the world?

OR, would it mean that Bigfoots are materialized temporal entities - that are indeed REAL for a temporary time frame. That can be seen, heat sensed, and tested for DNA as proof of a temporal `indention'/actualization into our common consensus - one that can be visualized and quantified - BUT - ultimately, one without an ontological structure to maintain its realness. Its temporalness. It's qualitative-ness of its `space' constitution.

But, even if that is the finding, and ultimately, someday, is a position where fair minded people can find agreement; - it will also be a step forward in ways of thinking about other paranormal and fortean `events'  - as a `temporal structure' that bends our common consensus reality into a `temporary special consensus' - with what includes a real ontological structure to be perceived.

And, suddenly - a real Bigfoot - will be known as `more' than an imaginary creature - and one that doesn't need a breeding population to propagate into the world. Or, needing capture to prove that it is real. (I think it would be like `capturing' a doppelganger of a dead person that appears - impossible.)

But, it will also mean perhaps, the first step onto the slippery slope of an agreement that NOT all of our reality ` is real' - and that perhaps other contingencies could `snap' the `programming of the software' entirely - leaving `us' as a `temporary character' in a whole different consensus.



Please tell a friend that you filled up at Barf Stew - http://www.barfstew.blogspot.com/ and have you checked out the BS sidebar and the great websites in the blogroll?