Difference between Research years ago and Research now.

This board is open for discussion on the Australian Yowie, Bigfoot, Yeti & Sasquatch. Please keep on topic in this forum.
User avatar
yowiedan
Long Time Contributor
Posts: 681
Joined: Sat Feb 18, 2012 8:04 pm
Position: Field Researcher

Difference between Research years ago and Research now.

Unread post by yowiedan » Sun Oct 21, 2018 5:59 pm

I have been looking at and watching a lot of so-called Yowie Researchers from the present and think a lot are living up in fairyland, to put it bluntly. Years ago researchers would gather their trail cameras and sound recorders etc and show what they had found with everything they had to back up what they were putting forward to us on Ayr or other online sites. They would go into great detail with their findings, then they would discuss and answer any questions the fellow researchers put forward to them. So really great questions and answers were had during these times.

Now its Rafferty Rules, We get eyeshine which is actually house lights in the distance and people saying they have 100% proof from blurry trail camera pictures and sound recordings that they say are Yowie howls which are clearly bird calls. WTF! are people getting more stupid or are they just wanting Youtube subscriptions or hits or whatever 5-second" FAME" they can get! The people who are doing all this c**p and I won't say research because it isn't researching its bullshit. They are making us, the ones who actually go out and do honest research a great deal of harm as people around the world label us as crackpots. Really after J&J DRIBBLED their way on tv one morning made us all like a bunch of halfwits. It's about time we all said what we really think about all these bullshit artists and make them answer the HARD questions, let's see how much dribble comes out of the lying mouths.

(kill) (kill) (kill) (kill) (kill) (kill)

Yowie bait
Long Time Contributor
Posts: 2146
Joined: Wed Jan 13, 2016 5:06 pm
Position: Believer

Re: Difference between Research years ago and Research now.

Unread post by Yowie bait » Mon Oct 22, 2018 11:25 am

Hi Yowiedan ,why don't you post some examples/links of the youtube researchers you think may be misleading the extremely gullible bigfoot commuity?

Much easier for a youtube researcher to upload a video on youtube and TELL people what it is than to actually ask opinions of your peers who are likely to point out the flaws in the image or evidence collected...like if its a photoshopped stump or not.

(thumb Down)
Yowie Bait

User avatar
Rusty2
Long Time Contributor
Posts: 1424
Joined: Mon Aug 23, 2010 5:30 pm
Position: Believer
Location: East Coast

Re: Difference between Research years ago and Research now.

Unread post by Rusty2 » Mon Oct 22, 2018 3:35 pm

I seriously don't think anyone gets it's Daniel , we are in the field of Biological Anthropolgy .
This is a scientific field and we must adhere to a scientific method in order to get these creatures identified .

"Researchers" making extraordinary claims with no evidence (facts) are no more than pseudoscientists committing the equivelant of scientific fraud .

PSEUDOSCIENCE
A “scientific” claim that is made without the appropriate evidence to back it up is called pseudoscience. Research becomes pseudoscience when it attempts to clothe itself in the legitimacy of scientific rigor without actually subscribing to the scientific method. Pseudoscience can be deliberately deceptive or merely misguided. The problem is presenting statements as 100% true when the methodology doesn’t allow that certainty .

SCIENTIFIC FRAUD
The term "scientific fraud" is used to describe intentional misrepresentation of the methods, procedures, or results of scientific research. Behavior characterized as scientific fraud includes fabrication, falsification, or plagiarism in proposing, performing, or reviewing scientific research, or in reporting research results .

User avatar
yowiedan
Long Time Contributor
Posts: 681
Joined: Sat Feb 18, 2012 8:04 pm
Position: Field Researcher

Re: Difference between Research years ago and Research now.

Unread post by yowiedan » Mon Oct 22, 2018 4:26 pm

Yowie bait wrote:
Mon Oct 22, 2018 11:25 am
Hi Yowiedan, why don't you post some examples/links of the youtube researchers you think may be misleading the extremely gullible bigfoot community?

Much easier for a youtube researcher to upload a video on youtube and TELL people what it is than to actually ask opinions of your peers who are likely to point out the flaws in the image or evidence collected...like if its a photoshopped stump or not.

(thumb Down)
Hey Yowie Bait, there are plenty of examples out there and it only takes a bit of common sense in which I know you have a lot of to realise who is talking shite and releasing c**p bogus images and claims that can't be backed up with science as Rusty has talked about. Also, all the ones who take a heap of pictures then see Pareidolia faces in the photo's but didn't see anything when they were there in the area are in dreamland. There is so much bullshit out there that we are going down a rollercoaster ride to HELL!

User avatar
Ray Doherty
Long Time Contributor
Posts: 796
Joined: Thu Nov 10, 2011 7:26 am
Position: Researcher
Facebook Profile Page: www.facebook.com/theaustralianyowieproject
Location: North Brisbane

Re: Difference between Research years ago and Research now.

Unread post by Ray Doherty » Mon Oct 22, 2018 5:11 pm

Spot on Dan & Rusty, couldn't have said it better............
'I want to believe'

Yowie bait
Long Time Contributor
Posts: 2146
Joined: Wed Jan 13, 2016 5:06 pm
Position: Believer

Re: Difference between Research years ago and Research now.

Unread post by Yowie bait » Mon Oct 22, 2018 10:59 pm

yowiedan wrote:
Mon Oct 22, 2018 4:26 pm
Yowie bait wrote:
Mon Oct 22, 2018 11:25 am
Hi Yowiedan, why don't you post some examples/links of the youtube researchers you think may be misleading the extremely gullible bigfoot community?

Much easier for a youtube researcher to upload a video on youtube and TELL people what it is than to actually ask opinions of your peers who are likely to point out the flaws in the image or evidence collected...like if its a photoshopped stump or not.

(thumb Down)
Hey Yowie Bait, there are plenty of examples out there and it only takes a bit of common sense in which I know you have a lot of to realise who is talking shite and releasing c**p bogus images and claims that can't be backed up with science as Rusty has talked about. Also, all the ones who take a heap of pictures then see Pareidolia faces in the photo's but didn't see anything when they were there in the area are in dreamland. There is so much bullshit out there that we are going down a rollercoaster ride to HELL!
Yeah its really bad. A lot of fuel on youtube for the naysayers and skeptics.

Some of these channels have almost cult like followings and not one shred of evidence. Others don't even bother to find paeredoilia and just film a tree for five minutes and get thousands of hits!

It is important though. One of, if not the most important revelation of our time with the right proof !! (thumb up)
Yowie Bait

Pertys80
Bronze Status
Posts: 83
Joined: Thu May 17, 2018 1:29 pm

Re: Difference between Research years ago and Research now.

Unread post by Pertys80 » Tue Oct 23, 2018 8:49 am

You know the best thing about Youtube? You actually get to choose what you want to watch, and so does everyone else for that matter..
As an amateur "Youtube Researcher" myself, I try my hardest to remain objective with my findings, and let my audience draw up their own conclusions..
I can tell you my channel is not about subs and likes, but rather my very own journey into this field which I find absolutely fascinating.
If people want to jump on board for the ride, then hats off to them.. The amount of constructive feedback I get from certain subscribers is encouraging to say the least, and for someone that's learning along the way I think its extremely important..
You can sit back and read books and listen to radio shows to your hearts content, but it just ain't the same as getting out there and doing it yourself.
If you have a passion for the outdoors, then I'd encourage you to do the same.
Comparing the old with the new and worrying about our reputation being tarnished is pointless, doesn't matter how scientific you think you research is, the average Joe blow down George St will think you're nuts regardless.
Whether you've been in this game for decades or just a few months, I think the most important thing one could do is think outside the square, try something different..
If our predecessors tried something to no avail, then why go down the same route?
Don't worry about so called "c**p" researchers that bug you with their far fetched opinions, unsub and don't watch it..
Wouldn't it prove more beneficial to focus on improving our own work? You never know, all that effort might just pay off one day.😉👍

User avatar
Ray Doherty
Long Time Contributor
Posts: 796
Joined: Thu Nov 10, 2011 7:26 am
Position: Researcher
Facebook Profile Page: www.facebook.com/theaustralianyowieproject
Location: North Brisbane

Re: Difference between Research years ago and Research now.

Unread post by Ray Doherty » Tue Oct 23, 2018 10:17 am

In my view, the only ways to research this subject are, but no limited too;

1. Get into the field, into the bush - no substitute for doing it - learning is in the doing
2. study subjects,such as primatology and paleo anthropology
3. Capture all the data you can, measurements, sounds, castings, photos - everything
4. Learn how to analyze and interpret it
5. learn about other disciplines that will help - photography, tracking, wildlife behavior, bush tuckers
6. Write papers on your work and theories and as Neil frost once said, if your proud of your work and nothing to hide then use your real name - Be transparent!
7. Put yourself out-there with your work - be open to frank and constructive criticism and conversation
8. This community in this country is too small to burn bridges
9. Get out from behind the computer

Just my two cents - go, see and try for yourself before claiming to be an expert because in this field, no one is!
'I want to believe'

rowbe
New Member
Posts: 24
Joined: Fri Aug 31, 2018 3:13 pm
Position: Believer
Location: Sunshine Coast, Qld

Re: Difference between Research years ago and Research now.

Unread post by rowbe » Tue Oct 23, 2018 1:42 pm

I agree, there is a lot of contrived information and data on the internet (including you tube) re the hairy ones. You don't know what is legit and what isn't - I recently saw a short clip of a supposed to be hairy man but the costume looked more like one taken from the musical "cats", tail and all.

However, I have learnt a lot from viewing the threads and sightings info on this site. Its great to see the myriad of responses questioning certain sightings or events, etc. So thank you you are providing education to us novices, even if it is not meant to be. As a professional researcher myself (not in this area) I can understand the need for "proper" evidence based research. The internet is a problem or limitation for this field but it can also be a benefit - so I guess the c__p clips are here to stay.

User avatar
Dion
Long Time Contributor
Posts: 1819
Joined: Sat Jan 15, 2005 1:44 pm
Position: Researcher
Location: Passing through the ethereal

Re: Difference between Research years ago and Research now.

Unread post by Dion » Tue Oct 23, 2018 3:41 pm

I think the internet has had a play in this, research used to limited to a small group of people of like minds which was all shared within a community like here on AYR now with Facebook and You-tube and many other self managing websites every researcher has become his or her own research king, seeking expression through that medium (the internet).

The problem is many who dont have much experience in the field think they can post whatever they like, which they can in due respect, we do live in a democracy after all where free speech is permitted. However I do believe a small minority who do hoax ultimately for there own agendas seek to do so for their own self worth.

The internet is a great and wonderful thing but its also a disease for many other reasons.

And without going on a rant I will leave it at that.
“The day science begins to study non-physical phenomena, it will make more progress in one decade than in all the previous centuries of its existence.” - Nikola Tesla

User formally known as chewy

Yowie bait
Long Time Contributor
Posts: 2146
Joined: Wed Jan 13, 2016 5:06 pm
Position: Believer

Re: Difference between Research years ago and Research now.

Unread post by Yowie bait » Tue Oct 23, 2018 4:51 pm

Some good points made there. If you really want to be taken seriously then go the science route and back up your findings with hard evidence which is hard work especially if you wanna prove it.

Dion mentions facebook and youtube and i think thats whats killing forums. If researchers arent posting findings on AYR as Yowie Dan has said then its probably just a sign of the times.
Yowie Bait

User avatar
yowiedan
Long Time Contributor
Posts: 681
Joined: Sat Feb 18, 2012 8:04 pm
Position: Field Researcher

Re: Difference between Research years ago and Research now.

Unread post by yowiedan » Tue Oct 23, 2018 5:59 pm

Yowie bait wrote:
Tue Oct 23, 2018 4:51 pm
Some good points made there. If you really want to be taken seriously then go the science route and back up your findings with hard evidence which is hard work especially if you wanna prove it.

Dion mentions facebook and youtube and i think thats whats killing forums. If researchers arent posting findings on AYR as Yowie Dan has said then its probably just a sign of the times.
I know that on here (Ayr) is the best model for showing evidence and also being found out as a fraud or a true honest researcher as there are too many long-term researchers that are on the ball.

Pertys80
Bronze Status
Posts: 83
Joined: Thu May 17, 2018 1:29 pm

Re: Difference between Research years ago and Research now.

Unread post by Pertys80 » Tue Oct 23, 2018 7:53 pm

I don't think there is anything wrong with presenting evidence either way, providing its carried out properly.
For me personally, I'll be doing both if I find evidence worthy of putting up on this forum..
Like the strange foot prints I found, I got feedback from both YT and this place..
Its unfortunate there are clowns out there that do take the p#@s, surely most people could see through their BS.

Yowie bait
Long Time Contributor
Posts: 2146
Joined: Wed Jan 13, 2016 5:06 pm
Position: Believer

Re: Difference between Research years ago and Research now.

Unread post by Yowie bait » Tue Oct 23, 2018 9:19 pm

yowiedan wrote:
Tue Oct 23, 2018 5:59 pm
Yowie bait wrote:
Tue Oct 23, 2018 4:51 pm
Some good points made there. If you really want to be taken seriously then go the science route and back up your findings with hard evidence which is hard work especially if you wanna prove it.

Dion mentions facebook and youtube and i think thats whats killing forums. If researchers arent posting findings on AYR as Yowie Dan has said then its probably just a sign of the times.
I know that on here (Ayr) is the best model for showing evidence and also being found out as a fraud or a true honest researcher as there are too many long-term researchers that are on the ball.
Yeah I agree, present the evidence on AYR if you think its feasable. Not everyone is going to comment though and you may stuff up at first but mistakes are ok . You can learn from them.

If your faking then youll get called out eventually. Not everyone is faking though. Some are convinced of what they find. I know ive been there. I held onto a still pic I had for ages. Even posted it on AYR with no comments and eventually a couple of 12 year olds convinced me it was just a stump.
Yowie Bait

User avatar
yowiedan
Long Time Contributor
Posts: 681
Joined: Sat Feb 18, 2012 8:04 pm
Position: Field Researcher

Re: Difference between Research years ago and Research now.

Unread post by yowiedan » Tue Oct 23, 2018 9:27 pm

Yowiebait, atleast you can see it, not like some Mcleods on here.

User avatar
Slats
Silver Status
Posts: 152
Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2017 7:48 pm
Position: Field Researcher
Facebook Profile Page: https://www.facebook.com/WestOzYowieResearch/
Location: Perth
Contact:

Re: Difference between Research years ago and Research now.

Unread post by Slats » Wed Oct 24, 2018 10:51 am

Hey Guys
Similar to Pertys, my research channel is fairly young. I myself have been guilty of some over excitement in presenting evidence. However, through learning, by watching the likes of you more experienced guys Yowie Dan, Rusty and Ray. Talking, asking questions of questions of the senior guys here on the forum like Yowie Bait and Dion. Reading the blogs and various books I've learnt along the way and it has been a steep curve.
I'll put my hand up and say that I recently shared the 100% percent proof video that was recently released on my Facebook page and was told pretty quickly that it could easily damage my reputation so I have since decided to take it down.
I have shared my videos on the various groups with varied response. But, interestingly, I created and shared a map of the West Australian sightings and it has had the best response yet!
Off the back of that one post I've noticed more than ever the yowie/bigfoot community want facts, they want to see the genuine hours of research and follow up you do on possible evidence. They want to ask the questions and hear the responses. I strongly believe now more than ever before that a methodical, scientific approach is the only way forward.
I would also hope that the "senior" researchers continue to critique and guide the "junior" researchers. Us newer researchers have the benefit of the years of experience that have come before us.

inthedark
Gold Status - Frequent Poster
Posts: 284
Joined: Mon Mar 19, 2018 11:40 am
Position: Unsure
Gender: Not Telling

Re: Difference between Research years ago and Research now.

Unread post by inthedark » Wed Oct 24, 2018 12:28 pm

I suspect the difference is down to two things:

1) monetised YT

and

2) the desperation borne of continued failure (worldwide) to find any actual evidence of BF

Otherwise, I agree with the sentiment that the fakers and dreamers give the field a bad name.

Yowie bait
Long Time Contributor
Posts: 2146
Joined: Wed Jan 13, 2016 5:06 pm
Position: Believer

Re: Difference between Research years ago and Research now.

Unread post by Yowie bait » Wed Oct 24, 2018 12:31 pm

Slats wrote:
Wed Oct 24, 2018 10:51 am
Hey Guys
Similar to Pertys, my research channel is fairly young. I myself have been guilty of some over excitement in presenting evidence. However, through learning, by watching the likes of you more experienced guys Yowie Dan, Rusty and Ray. Talking, asking questions of questions of the senior guys here on the forum like Yowie Bait and Dion. Reading the blogs and various books I've learnt along the way and it has been a steep curve.
I'll put my hand up and say that I recently shared the 100% percent proof video that was recently released on my Facebook page and was told pretty quickly that it could easily damage my reputation so I have since decided to take it down.
I have shared my videos on the various groups with varied response. But, interestingly, I created and shared a map of the West Australian sightings and it has had the best response yet!
Off the back of that one post I've noticed more than ever the yowie/bigfoot community want facts, they want to see the genuine hours of research and follow up you do on possible evidence. They want to ask the questions and hear the responses. I strongly believe now more than ever before that a methodical, scientific approach is the only way forward.
I would also hope that the "senior" researchers continue to critique and guide the "junior" researchers. Us newer researchers have the benefit of the years of experience that have come before us.
Thanks Slats for including me there but i have no where near the amount of experience as these guys that have been out in the field doing serious research but i did get some results when i tried my hand at it, just didnt follow up on anything properly so couldnt PROVE any of my claims. Ended up investigating light phenomena which is as impossible to prove as the bloody yowies.

I will be having a good go at it next year and maybe i will have some luck. Im in it for an encounter with the hairys more than anything which i know is rare but still possible imo.

I think that along with the scientific stuff, its good to keep an open mind to their abilities. Even something as simple as their incredible speed and stealth abilities is amazing and should never be discounted.

By the way i know of a guy who saw one in Perth. Ill try track him down and fwd you the details if i can find anything.(thumb up)
Yowie Bait

User avatar
Slats
Silver Status
Posts: 152
Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2017 7:48 pm
Position: Field Researcher
Facebook Profile Page: https://www.facebook.com/WestOzYowieResearch/
Location: Perth
Contact:

Re: Difference between Research years ago and Research now.

Unread post by Slats » Wed Oct 24, 2018 9:56 pm

Yowie bait wrote:
Wed Oct 24, 2018 12:31 pm
Slats wrote:
Wed Oct 24, 2018 10:51 am
Hey Guys
Similar to Pertys, my research channel is fairly young. I myself have been guilty of some over excitement in presenting evidence. However, through learning, by watching the likes of you more experienced guys Yowie Dan, Rusty and Ray. Talking, asking questions of questions of the senior guys here on the forum like Yowie Bait and Dion. Reading the blogs and various books I've learnt along the way and it has been a steep curve.
I'll put my hand up and say that I recently shared the 100% percent proof video that was recently released on my Facebook page and was told pretty quickly that it could easily damage my reputation so I have since decided to take it down.
I have shared my videos on the various groups with varied response. But, interestingly, I created and shared a map of the West Australian sightings and it has had the best response yet!
Off the back of that one post I've noticed more than ever the yowie/bigfoot community want facts, they want to see the genuine hours of research and follow up you do on possible evidence. They want to ask the questions and hear the responses. I strongly believe now more than ever before that a methodical, scientific approach is the only way forward.
I would also hope that the "senior" researchers continue to critique and guide the "junior" researchers. Us newer researchers have the benefit of the years of experience that have come before us.
Thanks Slats for including me there but i have no where near the amount of experience as these guys that have been out in the field doing serious research but i did get some results when i tried my hand at it, just didnt follow up on anything properly so couldnt PROVE any of my claims. Ended up investigating light phenomena which is as impossible to prove as the bloody yowies.

I will be having a good go at it next year and maybe i will have some luck. Im in it for an encounter with the hairys more than anything which i know is rare but still possible imo.

I think that along with the scientific stuff, its good to keep an open mind to their abilities. Even something as simple as their incredible speed and stealth abilities is amazing and should never be discounted.

By the way i know of a guy who saw one in Perth. Ill try track him down and fwd you the details if i can find anything.(thumb up)
Don't sell yourself short Yowie Bait you've answered plenty of questions and pointed out things to us "newbies". I completely agree regarding the extraordinary abilities that are reported and nothing should ever be discounted. That's the thing about a lot of the evidence its subjective therefore it can only be dismissed when it can be tested objectively.

That would be awesome if you find that report!

Yowie bait
Long Time Contributor
Posts: 2146
Joined: Wed Jan 13, 2016 5:06 pm
Position: Believer

Re: Difference between Research years ago and Research now.

Unread post by Yowie bait » Wed Oct 24, 2018 11:09 pm

Slats wrote:
Wed Oct 24, 2018 9:56 pm
Yowie bait wrote:
Wed Oct 24, 2018 12:31 pm
Slats wrote:
Wed Oct 24, 2018 10:51 am
Hey Guys
Similar to Pertys, my research channel is fairly young. I myself have been guilty of some over excitement in presenting evidence. However, through learning, by watching the likes of you more experienced guys Yowie Dan, Rusty and Ray. Talking, asking questions of questions of the senior guys here on the forum like Yowie Bait and Dion. Reading the blogs and various books I've learnt along the way and it has been a steep curve.
I'll put my hand up and say that I recently shared the 100% percent proof video that was recently released on my Facebook page and was told pretty quickly that it could easily damage my reputation so I have since decided to take it down.
I have shared my videos on the various groups with varied response. But, interestingly, I created and shared a map of the West Australian sightings and it has had the best response yet!
Off the back of that one post I've noticed more than ever the yowie/bigfoot community want facts, they want to see the genuine hours of research and follow up you do on possible evidence. They want to ask the questions and hear the responses. I strongly believe now more than ever before that a methodical, scientific approach is the only way forward.
I would also hope that the "senior" researchers continue to critique and guide the "junior" researchers. Us newer researchers have the benefit of the years of experience that have come before us.
Thanks Slats for including me there but i have no where near the amount of experience as these guys that have been out in the field doing serious research but i did get some results when i tried my hand at it, just didnt follow up on anything properly so couldnt PROVE any of my claims. Ended up investigating light phenomena which is as impossible to prove as the bloody yowies.

I will be having a good go at it next year and maybe i will have some luck. Im in it for an encounter with the hairys more than anything which i know is rare but still possible imo.

I think that along with the scientific stuff, its good to keep an open mind to their abilities. Even something as simple as their incredible speed and stealth abilities is amazing and should never be discounted.

By the way i know of a guy who saw one in Perth. Ill try track him down and fwd you the details if i can find anything.(thumb up)
Don't sell yourself short Yowie Bait you've answered plenty of questions and pointed out things to us "newbies". I completely agree regarding the extraordinary abilities that are reported and nothing should ever be discounted. That's the thing about a lot of the evidence its subjective therefore it can only be dismissed when it can be tested objectively.

That would be awesome if you find that report!
Thanks Slats. I think its early days yet for researchers. Maybe innovations in cameras and sound equipment etc will even things up for research once its affordable or maybe not?


Yeah i will chase that sighting up for you.. (detective)
Yowie Bait

User avatar
Simon M
Long Time Contributor
Posts: 820
Joined: Sun Sep 11, 2016 1:36 am
Position: Unsure
Location: South Western Victoria

Re: Difference between Research years ago and Research now.

Unread post by Simon M » Wed Oct 24, 2018 11:37 pm

The onus is on all of us as observers to be able to spot the signs of fakery and ask intelligent questions about what we're seeing and how it's being presented. We need to be able to 'read between the lines'.

That's even more difficult now in the digital era, but it's always been the case. There is a lot more stuff to look at now, and most of it is total rubbish being produced by BS artists for attention. That's not a great situation but it's simply the way things are.

It means that all of us need to ask succinct questions - of ourselves and of the people who upload these things - about every video we watch that claims to show you-know-what.

User avatar
hillbilly
Gold Status - Frequent Poster
Posts: 262
Joined: Wed Jun 01, 2005 11:35 am
Position: Believer
Location: Blue Mountains

Re: Difference between Research years ago and Research now.

Unread post by hillbilly » Thu Oct 25, 2018 10:05 am

I think that a lot of people see TV shows and think they will become a moneymaker as soon as a TV exec sees their Youtube shows. Wrong.
LOL
Media can be a fickle thing. What's hot today is trash tomorrow. The boat has sailed. (lol)

Pertys80
Bronze Status
Posts: 83
Joined: Thu May 17, 2018 1:29 pm

Re: Difference between Research years ago and Research now.

Unread post by Pertys80 » Thu Oct 25, 2018 11:42 am

If I adopted a scientific approach for my own research, and gathered enough evidence to present to a University for instance, what would happen?
Being a nobody with no accreditation, would they simply throw me out the door?
There's no denying there is a coverup going on here in Aussie, just as it is in the US..
So what would the point of going to the extra effort, just to get shot down in flames.
I can only speak for myself here, but I rarely get the time just to go out for a walk.. With the demands of work, family and everything in between, I don't have the time to play scientist..
First and foremost my own research is for no one but myself, I might sound selfish but I really couldn't care..lol.
Dont get me wrong here, I have no doubt they're out there but seeing a Yowie in the flesh is something I want to experience myself..
If I was lucky enough to get audio recordings or footage, I wouldn't be running to the media, it would be something I'd share with Friends, family, this forum and of course my Youtube channel.. Not for fame and fortune, no thank you.. lol
Its been half a century and we're still talking about the Patterson/ Gimlin film, kind of reminds of the Roswell incident and the UFO community.. That there alone tells me just to what extent the "powers that be" go to, to keep both subjects covered up.

User avatar
Wolf
Long Time Contributor
Posts: 1354
Joined: Thu Feb 04, 2016 10:46 pm
Position: Nature Lover

Re: Difference between Research years ago and Research now.

Unread post by Wolf » Thu Oct 25, 2018 1:09 pm

This goes back to the 'Bigfoot Bullshitters- Deserving of Anger or Pity?' thread a while back.

While having the potential to anger me, I choose to pity... or better, ignore completely.
ALL humans are inmates in this big asylum we call Planet Earth... there are those whose particular mental 'issue' feeds on attention...
those whose imaginations WANT to believe and talk themselves into capturing 'evidence' on film, then NEED to have it re-enforced by others...
those who believe money will answer their needs and do anything to get it...

...and everyone in between (and out between).


Best to ignore the inmates you dislike/disapprove of/disagree with and get on with your own particular mental explorations. (detective)

Perhaps I find this easier because I have no interest in 'proving' existence or gathering evidence. I prefer to speculate using evidence (mostly witness reports)... on behaviour, what they are, where they came from, where all the pieces fit, etc... which is why I enjoy writing fiction. It allows me to speculate and hopefully entertain at the same time.
(cheers)
The mightiest oak was once a nut that stood his ground https://www.sasquatchstories.com

Yowie bait
Long Time Contributor
Posts: 2146
Joined: Wed Jan 13, 2016 5:06 pm
Position: Believer

Re: Difference between Research years ago and Research now.

Unread post by Yowie bait » Sat Oct 27, 2018 8:16 am

Wolf wrote:
Thu Oct 25, 2018 1:09 pm
This goes back to the 'Bigfoot Bullshitters- Deserving of Anger or Pity?' thread a while back.

While having the potential to anger me, I choose to pity... or better, ignore completely.
ALL humans are inmates in this big asylum we call Planet Earth... there are those whose particular mental 'issue' feeds on attention...
those whose imaginations WANT to believe and talk themselves into capturing 'evidence' on film, then NEED to have it re-enforced by others...
those who believe money will answer their needs and do anything to get it...

...and everyone in between (and out between).


Best to ignore the inmates you dislike/disapprove of/disagree with and get on with your own particular mental explorations. (detective)

Perhaps I find this easier because I have no interest in 'proving' existence or gathering evidence. I prefer to speculate using evidence (mostly witness reports)... on behaviour, what they are, where they came from, where all the pieces fit, etc... which is why I enjoy writing fiction. It allows me to speculate and hopefully entertain at the same time.
(cheers)
True Wolf, some of these youtube researchers are obviously suffering from serious mental heath issues or very lonely people and we should take that into account and yeah no one is forcing us to watch em.
Yowie Bait

User avatar
Black
Silver Status
Posts: 163
Joined: Wed Feb 14, 2018 11:38 am
Position: Monk

Re: Difference between Research years ago and Research now.

Unread post by Black » Sun Oct 28, 2018 11:31 am

I don't see any difference between the way yowie researchers of yesteryear did business, compared to today.

The big budget "not" Finding Bigfoot tv series, revealed the likelihood of obtaining "any" reliable bigfoot hard evidence as zero, anecdotal evidence as possible, and all reports to go by, as anecdotal. It's exactly the same here in Australia. Everything points to bigfoot/Howie as an otherworldly being.

When a report is received, the researcher obtains everything they can about the incident, which is about 98% of the report, and devotes about 1% to finding out about the person making the report and about 1% to finding out about the environment location the incident took place. The person and the location are the only two verifiable pieces of evidence!

As for video sharing it has always been a double edged sword. Is it worthy enough to post, all the criticisms, then not report your findings out of risk of ridicule? In any community, people want to share and contribute, and have their voice heard, and this is all it is about. Interpretations is where conflict arises. People don't know how to control their emotions, and fear being made fools of.

Yowie bait
Long Time Contributor
Posts: 2146
Joined: Wed Jan 13, 2016 5:06 pm
Position: Believer

Re: Difference between Research years ago and Research now.

Unread post by Yowie bait » Sun Oct 28, 2018 1:00 pm

Black wrote:
Sun Oct 28, 2018 11:31 am
I don't see any difference between the way yowie researchers of yesteryear did business, compared to today.

The big budget "not" Finding Bigfoot tv series, revealed the likelihood of obtaining "any" reliable bigfoot hard evidence as zero, anecdotal evidence as possible, and all reports to go by, as anecdotal. It's exactly the same here in Australia. Everything points to bigfoot/Howie as an otherworldly being.

When a report is received, the researcher obtains everything they can about the incident, which is about 98% of the report, and devotes about 1% to finding out about the person making the report and about 1% to finding out about the environment location the incident took place. The person and the location are the only two verifiable pieces of evidence!

As for video sharing it has always been a double edged sword. Is it worthy enough to post, all the criticisms, then not report your findings out of risk of ridicule? In any community, people want to share and contribute, and have their voice heard, and this is all it is about. Interpretations is where conflict arises. People don't know how to control their emotions, and fear being made fools of.
I think more should be asked with witness reports but how far do you go with it? Should we be finding out what blood types witnesses are, history of mental health, star signs or is just someone seeing a yowie enough? Is it just a bit of excitement for the listeners and a chance for us to get on our high horse and judge another individuals credibility or is it really not important?

I know its important for the witnesses but in truth it is circumstantial evidence and not worthy for scientific review. It is a good way to choose a research location i suppose but really why put yourself out and share your encounter if youve got nothing to back it up except your story? Still its pretty much all weve got for description and some behaviours of the hairys.
Yowie Bait

User avatar
yowiedan
Long Time Contributor
Posts: 681
Joined: Sat Feb 18, 2012 8:04 pm
Position: Field Researcher

Re: Difference between Research years ago and Research now.

Unread post by yowiedan » Sun Oct 28, 2018 2:53 pm

Yowie bait wrote:
Sun Oct 28, 2018 1:00 pm
Black wrote:
Sun Oct 28, 2018 11:31 am
I don't see any difference between the way yowie researchers of yesteryear did business, compared to today.

The big budget "not" Finding Bigfoot tv series, revealed the likelihood of obtaining "any" reliable bigfoot hard evidence as zero, anecdotal evidence as possible, and all reports to go by, as anecdotal. It's exactly the same here in Australia. Everything points to bigfoot/Howie as an otherworldly being.

When a report is received, the researcher obtains everything they can about the incident, which is about 98% of the report, and devotes about 1% to finding out about the person making the report and about 1% to finding out about the environment location the incident took place. The person and the location are the only two verifiable pieces of evidence!

As for video sharing it has always been a double edged sword. Is it worthy enough to post, all the criticisms, then not report your findings out of risk of ridicule? In any community, people want to share and contribute, and have their voice heard, and this is all it is about. Interpretations is where conflict arises. People don't know how to control their emotions, and fear being made fools of.
I think more should be asked with witness reports but how far do you go with it? Should we be finding out what blood types witnesses are, history of mental health, star signs or is just someone seeing a yowie enough? Is it just a bit of excitement for the listeners and a chance for us to get on our high horse and judge another individuals credibility or is it really not important?

I know its important for the witnesses but in truth it is circumstantial evidence and not worthy for scientific review. It is a good way to choose a research location i suppose but really why put yourself out and share your encounter if youve got nothing to back it up except your story? Still its pretty much all weve got for description and some behaviours of the hairys.
Hey Yowiebait, Most eyewitnesses are not researchers and most don't even tell their story to loved ones. So when they do finally spill the beans we all should listen to what they have to say because they do catch Yowies doing things like going through garbage bins etc that us researchers don't see. The accounts we hear from these eyewitnesses sound incredible and sometimes you think do I believe this person? but in saying that who in their right mind will come out and say they have seen a creature that isn't supposed to be real!!!. The eyewitnesses give a good account and should be listened to because they only tell what they have seen and not being a researcher they don't make up stuff because they are not in the cryptid world and don't know what fakery has been shown and are oblivious to that. So I do believe them and have gone to areas in the Blue Mountains because of these reports and have had some great results because of these reports.

Yowie bait
Long Time Contributor
Posts: 2146
Joined: Wed Jan 13, 2016 5:06 pm
Position: Believer

Re: Difference between Research years ago and Research now.

Unread post by Yowie bait » Sun Oct 28, 2018 6:03 pm

yowiedan wrote:
Sun Oct 28, 2018 2:53 pm
Yowie bait wrote:
Sun Oct 28, 2018 1:00 pm
Black wrote:
Sun Oct 28, 2018 11:31 am
I don't see any difference between the way yowie researchers of yesteryear did business, compared to today.

The big budget "not" Finding Bigfoot tv series, revealed the likelihood of obtaining "any" reliable bigfoot hard evidence as zero, anecdotal evidence as possible, and all reports to go by, as anecdotal. It's exactly the same here in Australia. Everything points to bigfoot/Howie as an otherworldly being.

When a report is received, the researcher obtains everything they can about the incident, which is about 98% of the report, and devotes about 1% to finding out about the person making the report and about 1% to finding out about the environment location the incident took place. The person and the location are the only two verifiable pieces of evidence!

As for video sharing it has always been a double edged sword. Is it worthy enough to post, all the criticisms, then not report your findings out of risk of ridicule? In any community, people want to share and contribute, and have their voice heard, and this is all it is about. Interpretations is where conflict arises. People don't know how to control their emotions, and fear being made fools of.
I think more should be asked with witness reports but how far do you go with it? Should we be finding out what blood types witnesses are, history of mental health, star signs or is just someone seeing a yowie enough? Is it just a bit of excitement for the listeners and a chance for us to get on our high horse and judge another individuals credibility or is it really not important?

I know its important for the witnesses but in truth it is circumstantial evidence and not worthy for scientific review. It is a good way to choose a research location i suppose but really why put yourself out and share your encounter if youve got nothing to back it up except your story? Still its pretty much all weve got for description and some behaviours of the hairys.
Hey Yowiebait, Most eyewitnesses are not researchers and most don't even tell their story to loved ones. So when they do finally spill the beans we all should listen to what they have to say because they do catch Yowies doing things like going through garbage bins etc that us researchers don't see. The accounts we hear from these eyewitnesses sound incredible and sometimes you think do I believe this person? but in saying that who in their right mind will come out and say they have seen a creature that isn't supposed to be real!!!. The eyewitnesses give a good account and should be listened to because they only tell what they have seen and not being a researcher they don't make up stuff because they are not in the cryptid world and don't know what fakery has been shown and are oblivious to that. So I do believe them and have gone to areas in the Blue Mountains because of these reports and have had some great results because of these reports.
Yeah i reckon eyewitnesses and researchers could help each other a lot. Thing is not many are going to go back to the encounter site immediately after an encounter or find or tell a researcher to go back there with.If they did they would probably find something to back up their story and it wouldnt be such circumstantial evidence then.

Much easier these days of course with iphones and the internet to find information and take photos as opposed to the 70s or 80s.
Yowie Bait

User avatar
Black
Silver Status
Posts: 163
Joined: Wed Feb 14, 2018 11:38 am
Position: Monk

Re: Difference between Research years ago and Research now.

Unread post by Black » Mon Oct 29, 2018 3:00 pm

Researchers, when meeting a witness for the first time, could ask them to complete two questionnaires.

The first one on the encounter with view to being made public, and option to use real name or remain anonymous.

The second one (optional) about the witness, no name to be attached, not for the public, for research purposes only, anonymous, and finding out a lot more about the Witness and the encounter they wouldn't share publicly.

I don't believe it's a mere coincidence, many witnesses just happen to be in a state of guilt, or shock, or trauma, or hypervigilence, or grief, or uncertainty, or sexual arousal, or have a history of strange experiences or experimentations with esp, on certain medications or drugs or alcohol, or energy healing, or the paranormal, or meditation, etc. All these factors could potentially indicate the ripping of a veil aside, or activation of the third eye and clairaudience, allowing the viewer to see normally unseen entities.

As for the environment, every researcher should have a basic understanding of the flora and fauna. The Bush area may have an influx of noxious weed which is killing it, chemicals may be getting dumped, waterways may have chemicals in them or changed in course. A Bush spirit attracted to something sick or wrong in that part of the Bush?

Every researcher should also be aware the witness will likely describe the encounter as an encounter with a flesh and blood being, as real as you or I. The researcher while being supportive should be aware this is part of the experience and not to fall into the trap of concentrating all efforts in search of a flesh and blood being.

Just my two cents....

Post Reply