Do you think yowies are flesh and blood or something else???

[AMH-Hunter]

Good point Dion, the Edomites were simply another race.
I only considered them, because the brief physical description of Esau that we get in Genesis, although ambiguous, does describe him in a way that I believe he could have been physically similiar to the Hairy men.
But, I hadn't fully analysed it, and so of course there was going to be aspects I didn't consider.
The spiritual aspect was one such thing I forgot to consider.

Also here's a website that analyses biblical Bigfoot possibilities such as the Nephilim, genetic tampering, curses etc.
I thought it was pretty interesting.

http://christianparanormalanswers.com/?p=368

Sorry if this post lacks any real sort of direction or intention, and I apologize for it's briefness. But I'm at school, and not really in the right mindset to think about stuff like this.

But Dion, I agree that the idea of them being remnants of the Edomites fails to have an explanation for why so many encounters report spiritual sides. Plus, the Edomites were a physical race, if they were remnants of them, I'd think we would have had some sort of clear physical evidence by now.

Kind regards
AMH

[sensesonfire]

Sensesonfire, AMH.

I am pretty sure the descendants or Sons of Esau would not have had the spiritual or supernatural abilities that are often described from eye witnesses from Yowie and Bigfoot encounters. Which says to me they (being Yowies and Bigfoot) are something else entirely.



Hi AYR,
Yes, I agree with you. With the reports of glowing red eyes; the disappearing and rematerialsing ; the levitating abilities and Yowies accompanied
by large black cats speaks dominantly of one thing....... the supernatural. To me, it's superfluous speculating what yowie/bigfoot are when I have no doubt
they are supernatural beings. I've looked over a lot of reports over the last few years and have found a lot of evidence to support my claim as no doubt you
and AMH have also. I'm going to digress a little here and mention another possible supernatural discovery that I have as much interest in as yowie/bigfoot
and thats the discovery in 1994 of the Chupacabra, but thats off topic on this thread.

[sensesonfire]

The episode Finding Bigfoot - West Virginia revealed that a person observed Bigfoot watching him as he gutted the deer that he had shot, apparently they have a fondness for the intestines which he leaves behind for them. This had encouraged the Finding Bigfoot crew to do the same, depositing buckets of animal guts in various positions and setting up cameras to film any intruders. To their excitement, when the came back to inspect, the offal had gone;however when they reviewed the film in the cameras they discovered that they had all malfunctioned ( an apparent common occurrence when trying to obtain filmed evidence of Bigfoot). In this same episode a couple witnessed a bigfoot at close quarters jumping a fence and discovered clumps of Bigfoot hair caught in the barbed wire, when the crew sent it off for DNA analyses they were told that it was inconclusive. Another person reported seeing a Bigfoot loping up the side of a steep embankment. No reports of soil displacement or footprints and we are talking about a creature weighing in at 7 to 800 pounds so there would have been marked evidence of soil disturbance.

What will it take before people realise that these are shape shifting creatures not of this world.

[FM80]

Without the evidence of a physical Yowie/Bigfoot I am compelled to look at a personal biblical theory that a lot of people would find preposterous; but with all theories of the supernatural ( and that is exactly what Yowie/Bigfoot are until physical evidence to prove otherwise)

So everything without physical evidence is supernatural? Think of all the stuff we didn't have physical evidence of 100 years ago that we now have evidence for. I think it is wrong to fill any gaps in our knowledge by attributing it to the supernatural or god (which ever of the thousands of supposed gods) because as we fill those gaps there will eventually be no more gaps to fit the supernatural/god in.

as the Bible points out that as much as there are angels roaming the earth there are also demons in all shapes and guises. The Bible deals with Creation, or as the modernists refer to......Intelligent design. Scientists and others deal with evolution. This is my belief: there could be no better way than Satan himself to detract and confuse people from the Bibles theory of Creation
than to, over the centuries ,produce a hominid/ape like creature to convince people we really did evolve from apes - a sought of missing link. He is the Prince of this world and he is certainly capable of doing this. I believe the Yowie/Bigfoot are supernatural shape- shifters ( even demons) and I know I am going to cop a lot of flak from this but I believe my Theory has just as much relevance as someone with a differing view, that is until somebody either captures one or finds a dead creature to extract DNA to prove its physical existence.

WOW. I'll steer clear of the creation/ID aspect because it's too ridiculous to warrant a discussion in my opinion. So you require DNA/physical evidence to convince you that they are real, but you require no evidence to believe they are supernatural.

Satan must be bad at his job. His best effort to try and derail the theory of evolution was to create bigfoot, a creature that you yourself believe is a supernatural entity, a being that science (that deals with evolution) refuses to acknowledge, a creature that does it's best to stay hidden. All satan had to do was plant fossils of dinosaurs with earlier fossils and the theory would be dead in the water.

You know in science, one of the best ways to make a name for yourself, win a nobel prize or make a lot of money is to disprove long held scientific theories. Evolution has withstood 150 years of people trying to disprove it and it has only grown stronger through the accumulation of more evidence. Furthermore, the theory of evolution has probably had more people trying to contradict it than any other theory because of it's implications to religious beliefs. So far, nothing has dented it. That's the definition of a very strong theory. This is the way it is, it's reality, when people truly understand the theory it becomes undeniably true.

[sensesonfire]

Without the evidence of a physical Yowie/Bigfoot I am compelled to look at a personal biblical theory that a lot of people would find preposterous; but with all theories of the supernatural ( and that is exactly what Yowie/Bigfoot are until physical evidence to prove otherwise)

So everything without physical evidence is supernatural? Think of all the stuff we didn't have physical evidence of 100 years ago that we now have evidence for. I think it is wrong to fill any gaps in our knowledge by attributing it to the supernatural or god (which ever of the thousands of supposed gods) because as we fill those gaps there will eventually be no more gaps to fit the supernatural/god in.

as the Bible points out that as much as there are angels roaming the earth there are also demons in all shapes and guises. The Bible deals with Creation, or as the modernists refer to......Intelligent design. Scientists and others deal with evolution. This is my belief: there could be no better way than Satan himself to detract and confuse people from the Bibles theory of Creation
than to, over the centuries ,produce a hominid/ape like creature to convince people we really did evolve from apes - a sought of missing link. He is the Prince of this world and he is certainly capable of doing this. I believe the Yowie/Bigfoot are supernatural shape- shifters ( even demons) and I know I am going to cop a lot of flak from this but I believe my Theory has just as much relevance as someone with a differing view, that is until somebody either captures one or finds a dead creature to extract DNA to prove its physical existence.

WOW. I'll steer clear of the creation/ID aspect because it's too ridiculous to warrant a discussion in my opinion. So you require DNA/physical evidence to convince yo

u that they are real, but you require no evidence to believe they are supernatural.

Satan must be bad at his job. His best effort to try and derail the theory of evolution was to create bigfoot, a creature that you yourself believe is a supernatural entity, a being that science (that deals with evolution) refuses to acknowledge, a creature that does it's best to stay hidden. All satan had to do was plant fossils of dinosaurs with earlier fossils and the theory would be dead in the water.

You know in science, one of the best ways to make a name for yourself, win a nobel prize or make a lot of money is to disprove long held scientific theories. Evolution has withstood 150 years of people trying to disprove it and it has only grown stronger through the accumulation of more evidence. Furthermore, the theory of evolution has probably had more people trying to contradict it than any other theory because of it's implications to religious beliefs. So far, nothing has dented it. That's the definition of a very strong theory. This is the way it is, it's reality, when people truly understand the theory it becomes undeniably true.

You know in science the aim is to prove not disprove a theory but quite often the scientists end up contradicting their own beliefs . Yes, I do require good solid evidence that Bigfoot exists and I'm also confident that none will be forthcoming and on all the evidence I've seen suggests more supernatural than a physical creature. Have you not read my previous posts where I have questioned the lack of clear camera evidence, when they actually record an image - generally the picture is hazy and very indistinct. The malfunctioning of video cameras that may have presented a clear image and this I believe is a common occurrence. The absence of footprints or soil disturbance when people have investigated the spot where they had been and as I have said previously this is a creature of between 7-800 pounds sure to leave evidence. The TV series Finding Bigfoot is a good example of why Bigfoot doesn't exist physically. The crew have travelled the length and breadth of the U.S. without ever seeing one despite using heat detectors some with the ability to scan a 9 mile radius and supposedly in Bigfoot hotspots. I could continue but if you have not read my previous posts as to why I think Bigfoot is a supernatural being I suggest you do so; not just mine but also some other comments particularly Ruby's. The believers have never found a live one or a dead one and I have no doubt they never will.

[donjoman]

Maybe we need to determine the difference between Supernatural and ExtraTerrestrial...

[FM80]

You know in science the aim is to prove not disprove a theory

No actually that is completely incorrect. A hypothesis is made based on an observation (or several) then a hypothesis is formed. Scientists test this hypothesis to determine whether the hypothesis is true or not. Based on the results, the hypothesis is accepted or rejected. This is how evidence accumulates for a theory, like evolution. It would be a waste of time and money to just do experiments we know would support a theory. Scientific data from many disciplines support the theory of evolution independently. The strength of a theory is whether it is falsifiable. Theories or ideas that can not be falsified are actually extremely weak.

but quite often the scientists end up contradicting their own beliefs .

By belief I guess you mean their hypothesis. A good scientist doesn't have beliefs as such, they don't ignore evidence that doesn't agree with their 'beliefs'. If evidence and data contradict an idea they have formed it must be thrown out, the scientific process ensures this happens. Some scientists that champion a particular theory their entire career must accept they were wrong when faced with evidence and data, as you can imagine this can be very hard to accept, but they do, most of them anyway. Unfortunately creationists do not have this ability to accept reality, evidence and data. They move on to the next gap in our knowledge and say "science can't explain how ........... happened therefore god did it".

Yes, I do require good solid evidence that Bigfoot exists and I'm also confident that nontheir entire career e will be forthcoming and on all the evidence I've seen suggests more supernatural than a physical creature. Have you not read my previous posts where I have questioned the lack of clear camera evidence, when they actually record an image - generally the picture is hazy and very indistinct. The malfunctioning of video cameras that may have presented a clear image and this I believe is a common occurrence. The absence of footprints or soil disturbance when people have investigated the spot where they had been and as I have said previously this is a creature of between 7-800 pounds sure to leave evidence. The TV series Finding Bigfoot is a good example of why Bigfoot doesn't exist physically. The crew have travelled the length and breadth of the U.S. without ever seeing one despite using heat detectors some with the ability to scan a 9 mile radius and supposedly in Bigfoot hotspots. I could continue but if you have not read my previous posts as to why I think Bigfoot is a supernatural being I suggest you do so; not just mine but also some other comments particularly Ruby's. The believers have never found a live one or a dead one and I have no doubt they never will.

Yes I read those posts. Again you need good solid proof that they exists but you quite readily use absence of evidence to support your preconceived ideas like they are supernatural or a creation of satan. This is another problem with ideas like creation or the supernatural where people ignore evidence and cherry pick anomalies to support their ideas, they make reality conform to their ideas rather than the other way around. For example, what about all the physical evidence that supports their existence as a flesh and blood creature? Could the fact that Finding Bigfoot don't find Bigfoot because they are in the business of making an ongoing television series? They are traipsing around the bush with infra red cameras making too much noise etc? Possibly it's done for entertainment rather than science? I'd explore these reasons first before I headed straight for the supernatural.

[sensesonfire]

You know in science the aim is to prove not disprove a theory

No actually that is completely incorrect. A hypothesis is made based on an observation (or several) then a hypothesis is formed. Scientists test this hypothesis to determine whether the hypothesis is true or not. Based on the results, the hypothesis is accepted or rejected. This is how evidence accumulates for a theory, like evolution. It would be a waste of time and money to just do experiments we know would support a theory. Scientific data from many disciplines support the theory of evolution independently. The strength of a theory is whether it is falsifiable. Theories or ideas that can not be falsified are actually extremely weak.

but quite often the scientists end up contradicting their own beliefs .

By belief I guess you mean their hypothesis. A good scientist doesn't have beliefs as such, they don't ignore evidence that doesn't agree with their 'beliefs'. If evidence and data contradict an idea they have formed it must be thrown out, the scientific process ensures this happens. Some scientists that champion a particular theory their entire career must accept they were wrong when faced with evidence and data, as you can imagine this can be very hard to accept, but they do, most of them anyway. Unfortunately creationists do not have this ability to accept reality, evidence and data. They move on to the next gap in our knowledge and say "science can't explain how ........... happened therefore god did it".

Yes, I do require good solid evidence that Bigfoot exists and I'm also confident that nontheir entire career e will be forthcoming and on all the evidence I've seen suggests more supernatural than a physical creature. Have you not read my previous posts where I have questioned the lack of clear camera evidence, when they actually record an image - generally the picture is hazy and very indistinct. The malfunctioning of video cameras that may have presented a clear image and this I believe is a common occurrence. The absence of footprints or soil disturbance when people have investigated the spot where they had been and as I have said previously this is a creature of between 7-800 pounds sure to leave evidence. The TV series Finding Bigfoot is a good example of why Bigfoot doesn't exist physically. The crew have travelled the length and breadth of the U.S. without ever seeing one despite using heat detectors some with the ability to scan a 9 mile radius and supposedly in Bigfoot hotspots. I could continue but if you have not read my previous posts as to why I think Bigfoot is a supernatural being I suggest you do so; not just mine but also some other comments particularly Ruby's. The believers have never found a live one or a dead one and I have no doubt they never will.

Yes I read those posts. Again you need good solid proof that they exists but you quite readily use absence of evidence to support your preconceived ideas like they are supernatural or a creation of satan. This is another problem with ideas like creation or the supernatural where people ignore evidence and cherry pick anomalies to support their ideas, they make reality conform to their ideas rather than the other way around. For example, what about all the physical evidence that supports their existence as a flesh and blood creature? Could the fact that Finding Bigfoot don't find Bigfoot because they are in the business of making an ongoing television series? They are traipsing around the bush with infra red cameras making too much noise etc? Possibly it's done for entertainment rather than science? I'd explore these reasons first before I headed straight for the supernatural.

The only physical evidence we have correlated is footprints, tree carvings and hair samples of which when sent to lab for DNA analysis comes back as inconclusive. To me this doesn't suffice as evidence, only flesh and blood samples will substantiate. It's beyond belief that after hundreds of years amounting to hundreds to thousands of sightings no one has been able to prove its existence. Even the native Americans regard it as a mystical/spirit creature with which they co exist. Just draw your attention to 2 reported sightings in Western Australia where I live. One was at Coral Bay where a guy who is now a Qantas pilot was staying in a caravan on the edge of the desert, having just gone to bed the caravan door was flung open and standing in the doorway was a huge hairy creature which jumped onto the guys back pinning him to the bed. It growled menacingly in his face for about twenty seconds then jumped off and left. While to most reasonably intelligent people this would sound preposterous I totally believe this guy's story;however this animal was not of flesh and blood because there is no way a creature of 7-800 pounds could jump onto a humans back without causing major injury which non was reported. Another sighting occurred at Wandering also in West Australia where 2 guys were travelling 2 kms out of town when a yowie suddenly appeared out of nowhere and ran across the road in front of them into an open paddock. They watched it as it continued on and to their amazment it disappeared in front of their eyes.To me this belies any notion of a physical being it would be illogical to think otherwise. I say to people open your eyes to other explanations, do what scientists do and explore all possibilties.

[FM80]

Yeah I see where you're coming from. The lack of physical evidence is a problem, I guess that's what most of the people on this forum are trying to do, get some better evidence.

I totally agree that we have to keep an open mind and consider all possibilities, but I think it is lazy to have the view that 'there are things we know and the things we don't understand or know are supernatural'. I'd really hate for you to sell yourself short and deny yourself great discoveries because you've decided 'it's supernatural, might as well forget about it because we'll never know'. I mean can you imagine what it would be like if people still believed that diseases are a curse, or magic, and there's nothing we can do about it? Germ theory and the resultant benefits to man kind might never have been developed because people had 'shut up shop' so to speak and decided 'it's supernatural and therefore not worth investigating'. Please don't give up! Even if you search for evidence that they are supernatural (although I have no idea what that would be) you might be the one to find the most amazing piece of evidence yet!!

If there was stronger evidence that showed they were supernatural, I would have to accept it whether I liked it or not.

One thing I don't understand with the supernatural theory is why they appear in bush/rural settings. Why don't they materialise in Pitt Street in Sydney or other cities? Doesn't the fact that they appear predominantly in areas where a flesh and blood animal would most likely live (forest/bush) seem to support the fact that they are flesh and blood?

I can't say whether the pilot's story is true or not, but with that encounter I can't help thinking 'what's the point?". I mean, what's the point in going in to his caravan, growling at him, then running off? I could be wrong, but that one sounds a little made up and from what I can tell, not in line with usual yowie behaviour. However I can understand how you unflinchingly accept his story because it seems to suggest something supernatural.

[sensesonfire]

Yeah I see where you're coming from. The lack of physical evidence is a problem, I guess that's what most of the people on this forum are trying to do, get some better evidence.

I totally agree that we have to keep an open mind and consider all possibilities, but I think it is lazy to have the view that 'there are things we know and the things we don't understand or know are supernatural'. I'd really hate for you to sell yourself short and deny yourself great discoveries because you've decided 'it's supernatural, might as well forget about it because we'll never know'. I mean can you imagine what it would be like if people still believed that diseases are a curse, or magic, and there's nothing we can do about it? Germ theory and the resultant benefits to man kind might never have been developed because people had 'shut up shop' so to speak and decided 'it's supernatural and therefore not worth investigating'. Please don't give up! Even if you search for evidence that they are supernatural (although I have no idea what that would be) you might be the one to find the most amazing piece of evidence yet!!

If there was stronger evidence that showed they were supernatural, I would have to accept it whether I liked it or not.

One thing I don't understand with the supernatural theory is why they appear in bush/rural settings. Why don't they materialise in Pitt Street in Sydney or other cities? Doesn't the fact that they appear predominantly in areas where a flesh and blood animal would most likely live (forest/bush) seem to support the fact that they are flesh and blood?

I can't say whether the pilot's story is true or not, but with that encounter I can't help thinking 'what's the point?". I mean, what's the point in going in to his caravan, growling at him, then running off? I could be wrong, but that one sounds a little made up and from what I can tell, not in line with usual yowie behaviour. However I can understand how you unflinchingly accept his story because it seems to suggest something supernatural.

I know the supernatural theory sounds like a bit of a cop out because there is no evidence ( physical ) to back it up but as I've said there is very little flesh and blood evidence either. I no doubt you would have watched Dean Harrison's videohttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s3DCYTc9wN8 dealing with his Yowie attack in Jan 2009 in which he had a physical encounter with the creature but this does not surprise me ( and here we go, delving into the realms of the absurd to most people) because I believe these creatures are shape shifters. Dean was quite amazed that in pitch blackness with thick cloud cover and Quote "you couldn't see your hand in front of your face"unquote that the creature's eyes glowed a dull white. He reported that when the Yowie ran its body was motionless and this is a common theme with yowies/bigfoot where people have stated that they appear to be floating. As for the pilots yowie encounter being true or not I suppose if we are going to question every story there would be an awful lot of conjecture to sought out and surprisingly I accept about 90 % of reports. You say why don't they appear in Pitt St, Sydney or other cities, my way of thinking is that they can remain far more elusive in the bush than in the city where it may even be possible to capture one if they existed in physical form. I would love some good, solid flesh and blood evidence to present itself but I wont be getting my hopes up any time soon. Sorry about the belated reply to your comment.

[AL Pitman]

Do mystical creatures hunt ' kill and eat kangaroos, rip trees apart to fetch and eat witchitie grubs and sleep in crude bush shelters? I don't think so a
" mythical creature " would not need to eat at all it's got to be FLESH & BLOOD!

[sensesonfire]

Do mystical creatures hunt ' kill and eat kangaroos, rip trees apart to fetch and eat witchitie grubs and sleep in crude bush shelters? I don't think so a
" mythical creature " would not need to eat at all it's got to be FLESH & BLOOD!

How do we know that they eat and kill kangaroos etc? Has anybody actually seen them doing this - I don't think so. We are thinking on different levels here, I believe that suggestive evidence like this is to make us think that they are actually flesh and blood and until somebody sees it actually happen then it's all unproven. I just cant believe that when you see images of bigfoot/yowie presenting an image of a creature out of a horror movie that people actually believe they are flesh and blood. As I've said in my previous post the reason Yowies/Bigfoot don't appear in the cities is because if they were flesh and blood eventually one would be captured and that would expose the supernatural theory as being false so they remain in the bush elusive as ever appearing and disappearing at will,
no live ones or dead for that matter ever to be found.

[FM80]

the reason Yowies/Bigfoot don't appear in the cities is because if they were flesh and blood eventually one would be captured and that would expose the supernatural theory as being false so they remain in the bush elusive as ever appearing and disappearing at will,

You're missing my point. I am not wondering why they don't appear in Pitt Street any more than I'm wondering why dingoes don't appear in Pitt Street. I'm quite aware of why a wild animal would reside in the bush rather than the CBD. My point is, doesn't it seem possible - if they can appear and disappear at will - for them to appear wherever they like? Do you see where I'm going with this? Why do they appear in areas where it would be likely a real, wild animal would? It's like postulating that fish can breathe in air and water but we only ever find them in the water because they don't want to be caught.

no live ones ........ ever to be found

Bet many people would disagree you there, namely those who have had close and personal encounters. Actually, what's you personal experience with yowies?

[sensesonfire]

the reason Yowies/Bigfoot don't appear in the cities is because if they were flesh and blood eventually one would be captured and that would expose the supernatural theory as being false so they remain in the bush elusive as ever appearing and disappearing at will,

You're missing my point. I am not wondering why they don't appear in Pitt Street any more than I'm wondering why dingoes don't appear in Pitt Street. I'm quite aware of why a wild animal would reside in the bush rather than the CBD. My point is, doesn't it seem possible - if they can appear and disappear at will - for them to appear wherever they like? Do you see where I'm going with this? Why do they appear in areas where it would be likely a real, wild animal would? It's like postulating that fish can breathe in air and water but we only ever find them in the water because they don't want to be caught.

no live ones ........ ever to be found

Bet many people would disagree you there, namely those who have had close and personal encounters. Actually, what's you personal experience with yowies?

My personal experience with yowies? - that's just the point. For many years throughout the 70's,80's and 90's I trained standardbred horses (pacers) which meant travelling many thousands of kilometres to incorporate country racing. It covered a vast array of terrain from open paddocks to thick forest areas and at all hours of the day,night and early hours of the morning, never ever encountering any sign of these elusive creatures. The Glenforest area had an abundance of kangaroos, wallabies and wild pig as witnessed by the road kill, a positive smorgasbord for yowies; however with the one essential element missing (yowie) never to be found. One particular incident happened in 1983 the year that yowies had been reported in Kalamunda which includes the Glenforest area. Travelling along Albany highway through Glenforest I glanced to the left of me and noticed a sign which said "water - 150 metres - a sign that was barely noticeable. Coming back from Wagin, at around 1.00 am, my car's waterhose came away from the radiator loosing all the water. Miraculously ( or more to the point divine intervention) the incident happened right at the point of the water sign. It was a moonlight night so no need for torches as I trudged along a winding gravel track for the water some 100 metres or so into the forest. After a couple of treks into the bush, with kangaroos all around me I managed to recover enough water to be able to repair the water hose, fill up the radiator and be on my way - no sign of yowies. What I am saying is that I have had more opportunity than just about anybody to encounter a yowie but to no avail.

[sensesonfire]

the reason Yowies/Bigfoot don't appear in the cities is because if they were flesh and blood eventually one would be captured and that would expose the supernatural theory as being false so they remain in the bush elusive as ever appearing and disappearing at will,

You're missing my point. I am not wondering why they don't appear in Pitt Street any more than I'm wondering why dingoes don't appear in Pitt Street. I'm quite aware of why a wild animal would reside in the bush rather than the CBD. My point is, doesn't it seem possible - if they can appear and disappear at will - for them to appear wherever they like? Do you see where I'm going with this? Why do they appear in areas where it would be likely a real, wild animal would?

no live ones ........ ever to be found

Bet many people would disagree you there, namely those who have had close and personal encounters. Actually, what's you personal experience with yowies?

[ quote ] It's like postulating that fish can breathe in air and water but we only ever find them in the water because they don't want to be caught.


The difference is here is that we actually do catch them ( fish ) unlike yowie/bigfoot.

[FM80]

What I am saying is that I have had more opportunity than just about anybody to encounter a yowie but to no avail.

I feel a bit silly pointing this out because I'm sure you're aware of it, but no you haven't. Surely you can understand than many more people than you have had more opportunities to encounter a yowie but haven't. I feel like we're going round in circles here. I've been surfing for almost 20 years and I've never seen a great white and I've had plenty of opportunities to see one. Let me answer your response..... Yes of course we have caught great whites before and know they exist, but the fact that I have had many opportunities to encounter one but haven't is not evidence to support anything at all, it just means I haven't seen one. Just like you not having seen a yowie is evidence of nothing but the fact you haven't seen one.

Coming back from Wagin, at around 1.00 am, my car's waterhose came away from the radiator loosing all the water. Miraculously ( or more to the point divine intervention) the incident happened right at the point of the water sign.

You're not saying here that 'god' made you break down near a water source, are you? Please tell me this is tongue in cheek...

The difference is here is that we actually do catch them ( fish ) unlike yowie/bigfoot

Ha ha, nice one, but I think you missed the point. The analogy wasn't the 'catch' part, it was the fact that you are attributing totally unnecessary traits to the yowie when there is no need. You know mountain gorilla's were thought to be a local myth until the early 1900s, applying your logic to mountain gorilla's would be a bit silly.

[sensesonfire]

What I am saying is that I have had more opportunity than just about anybody to encounter a yowie but to no avail.

I feel a bit silly pointing this out because I'm sure you're aware of it, but no you haven't. Surely you can understand than many more people than you have had more opportunities to encounter a yowie but haven't. I feel like we're going round in circles here. I've been surfing for almost 20 years and I've never seen a great white and I've had plenty of opportunities to see one. Let me answer your response..... Yes of course we have caught great whites before and know they exist, but the fact that I have had many opportunities to encounter one but haven't is not evidence to support anything at all, it just means I haven't seen one. Just like you not having seen a yowie is evidence of nothing but the fact you haven't seen one.

Coming back from Wagin, at around 1.00 am, my car's waterhose came away from the radiator loosing all the water. Miraculously ( or more to the point divine intervention) the incident happened right at the point of the water sign.

You're not saying here that 'god' made you break down near a water source, are you? Please tell me this is tongue in cheek...

The difference is here is that we actually do catch them ( fish ) unlike yowie/bigfoot

Ha ha, nice one, but I think you missed the point. The analogy wasn't the 'catch' part, it was the fact that you are attributing totally unnecessary traits to the yowie when there is no need. You know mountain gorilla's were thought to be a local myth until the early 1900s, applying your logic to mountain gorilla's would be a bit silly.

[ quote ] You're not saying here that 'god' made you break down near a water source, are you? Please tell me this is tongue in cheek..

Now I think you're missing the point. No, I'm not saying that God made me break down at all, it's a breakdown; however I am saying that with about 100 km to the next point of civilisation, in the middle of no where it was no coincidence the car malfunction happened right at that point. I've had what I regard as four incidences of divine intervention which defies human logic and of which I wont go into here. Obviously you are an evolutionist, I believe in intelligent design and we are coming from different ends of the pendulum on this topic. Human logic is missing in the equation with all you flesh and blood yowie/ bigfoot believers because the biggest element of the equation is and has been missing for more than 400 years - yowie/bigfoot itself. Wish you well in your endeavour for positive proof but I certain it will never happen.

[FM80]

So it seems like we're about to agree to disagree, we're not really getting anywhere. I can't help responding to some things in your last post though.

About the car breakdown. You say that it was no coincidence that it happened where it did but in fact that's exactly what it was. A coincidence. Things like this happen all the time, there was a chance that you could have broken down at that water point and you did, I don't see the divine intervention here, it's just a very ordinary (although lucky) occurrence.

This forum probably isn't the best place for the evolution/creationism discussion but I'd love to continue it with you somehow. I would never try to ram evolution down your throat or be condescending because I know that anyone can move on from the creationist view if they want to. These aren't two competing, valid theories - evolution is just the way things are, whether we like it or not, whilst creationism is (going to be blunt here) a blatant refusal to accept reality and facts. That's not a good thing, like I said, don't sell yourself short.

[sensesonfire]

So it seems like we're about to agree to disagree, we're not really getting anywhere. I can't help responding to some things in your last post though.

About the car breakdown. You say that it was no coincidence that it happened where it did but in fact that's exactly what it was. A coincidence. Things like this happen all the time, there was a chance that you could have broken down at that water point and you did, I don't see the divine intervention here, it's just a very ordinary (although lucky) occurrence.

This forum probably isn't the best place for the evolution/creationism discussion but I'd love to continue it with you somehow. I would never try to ram evolution down your throat or be condescending because I know that anyone can move on from the creationist view if they want to. These aren't two competing, valid theories - evolution is just the way things are, whether we like it or not, whilst creationism is (going to be blunt here) a blatant refusal to accept reality and facts. That's not a good thing, like I said, don't sell yourself short.

[ Quote ] Yes of course we have caught great whites before and know they exist, but the fact that I have had many opportunities to encounter one but haven't is not evidence to support anything at all, it just means I haven't seen one. Just like you not having seen a yowie is evidence of nothing but the fact you haven't seen one.

Yes, we will have to agree to disagree, but before I end my discussion just refer to your,'' many opportunities to encounter a great white but haven't is not evidence to support anything at all, it just means I haven't seen one''. This is the difference: You could pretty much guarantee that if you surfed or swam in known great white habitats you would no doubt encounter one and in fairly quick time I imagine. The same cannot be said about yowie or bigfoot, many searches have been made over long periods with the most sophisticated equipment in supposed hotspots and all to no avail yet these creatures will appear suddenly and fleetingly out of no where to unsuspecting people and then quickly disappear. I have travelled through areas of yowie sightings many times in the day, late at night and early hours of the morning, on my own, never to encounter one. I know why I wont meet up with one but this delineates a religious theory and to the non believers that would be beyond their comprehension. Although I'm totally against capturing or shooting animals I'm afraid that is the only solid evidence that they are flesh and blood;however I do believe that was attempted ......... but failed spectacularly. Iv'e probably said far to much so I'm signing off on this discussion ( is that a sigh of relief I hear?)

[FM80]

No definitely not a sigh of relief, I've been enjoying the banter, we seem to have this section all to ourselves!!!

Hmmm, 'beyond non - believers comprehension'. You're implying that people who don't blindly believe in an obviously man made creation myth are missing something that only 'believers' understand. I have to strongly disagree there.

What is beyond my comprehension however is how people can reject reality and cling to obviously man made myths in the face of astronomically large amounts of information that accurately and correctly explain all those mysteries that the man made myths were initially invented to explain.

In a way I respect creationists for their courage and integrity - believe everything in the bible or nothing from the bible, because after all who are we to cherry pick the supposed word of god? But here is where it gets interesting (for me it's fascinating and I'd really appreciate your input and your point of view here sensesonfire)..................... Faced with this choice, we have to make a decision. Either acknowledge that the bible and christianity (or any religion for that matter) is quite obviously man made or accept everything in the bible. Now I can understand that 2000 years ago almost everything in the world was a mystery and things like earthquakes would have terrifyingly mysterious. Attributing things like this to a god of some sort would be totally understandable back then. But with the knowledge we have gained since then it is totally unnecessary.

Like I said I am fascinated by this and would love to understand more from a creationists point of view - in particular how creationists process the vast amounts of knowledge we now have about where we came from and how old the universe is.

If any admins are reading - can we keep going? Or do we have to move somewhere else?

[Rayza]

I am new to most of this yet with so many sightings worldwide one has to admit that Bigfoot/Yowie
must exist whether in the physical or paranormal! I am in Western Australia and have only just
started researching this phenomena and I must admit it is all quite interesting. Thanks to everyone
for the tremendous information you have provided.

Ray

[themanfromglad]

For a Yowie to be capable of coming fully into man's dimension and eating either vegetation or meat, does not mean that they are not paranormal. To be capable of floating and invisibility, does not prevent them from coming fully into man's dimension and behaving as an ordinary 3 dimensional being. Whether you describe this dimension changing ability as interdimensional or transdimensional, this is recognized in the States as being paranormal. Bigfoot can fly or float, while either visible or invisible. So Yowies should also have that capability. They do it by becoming weightless, as opposed to generating lift to overcome gravity. These are also referred to as 4th dimension capabilities. TIME was kicked out of the 4th dimension slot in the spring of 1975, by a group of academics at Univerisity of California at Berkeley, for the purpose of leaving that dimension to explain Bigfoot invisibility. Stephen Hawkings also participated in that decision. Hawkings was simultaneously given the job of writing a book that lumped TIME together with SPACE, so they had some place to place it. His book on SPACE-TIME, made no mention of Bigfoot, I guarantee you. That group of academics all studied a captivity report which contained hours of video of two Bigfoot that the FEDS held briefly in captivity, before they outwitted their captors and escaped. The Bigfoot also have other phases, similar to a moth and other insects having several phases. But the Bigfoot can move back and forth between those other phases.

Personally, I have been within 10 feet of Bigfoot, more times than I can count. And within 10 feet of little forest person, every day for the last 9 years. They are most comfortable by remaining invisible, so that they minimize fear in humans. As long as humans do not get afraid, then they don't do stupid things. They have found that it is much easier to be our friends, by remaining invisible. I will try and dig up a photo out of my files, of an invisible Bigfoot, taking a leak. Somebody posted it in the States several years ago, and was a bit perplexed. Please note the cloud like characteristics that was all the flash camera could pick up, due to the narrowness of visible light spectrum. Also note the spiral flow of warm bodily fluid, bending down under the pull of gravity.

[Scarts]

Themanfromglad,

Your posts are highly detailed and informative, tackling the "paranormal" aspects of bigfoot head-on! You touched upon it in your last post and I was wondering if you could expand with an explanation of the forces and processes involved in bringing a bigfoot from the 4th dimension to our physical reality. Thanks!

[themanfromglad]

My understanding comes from the book "X3" by Adrian Dvir. In that book, the degree of solidness that a interdimensional being appears to possess in say man's dimension, has to do with a subset of the free quanta energy strings which comprise matter. That book pinpoints subsidiary free quanta string energy as being the culprit that controls things like movement between dimensions. I have heard the process occuring, and it appeared to involve some electricity. The process does not have to make noise, however. All interdimensional beings appear to be able to do other theatrical tricks that involve electricity. Like zapping people, zapping glass objects to make noise, and making sudden flashes of light. I have received tiny zaps a couple of times. I have seen hundreds of light flashes in the woods. Zapping objects is an even more common occurrence. So they have a high level of internal electricity, that they likely use to facilitate dimension changes. They possibly can recharge their batteries from our electrical appliances. I have a couple of spirit buddies that like to hang out in close vicinity to electrical appliances like TV sets and computer screens. Batteries would be another good source for them. I suspect that the electricity is like a food substitute for them. We eat to recharge our batteries as well.

[Scarts]

Thanks! The terminologies you use feel to be from another neatly packaged pseudoscience, this time created by Adrian DVIR. Free quanta energy strings which comprise matter for instance. Would you say that is another way of saying "Chi energy" as taught in the East with the pseudoscience schools of acupuncture and martial arts? If it is, chi is a fascinating subject in it's own right as any practitioner of Tai Chi Chuan or Chi Gung will attest. It is also a force attested to be able to be felt in your own body, stored up in your body, and tapped into using visualisation and breathing techniques. In India it is called, Sanyama, the foundation of a host of rumoured spectacular feats. I can draw a number of parallels between the concepts.

There was a time when a lot of people were plotting bigfoot sightings and yowie sightings, and noting the presence of high voltage power lines in the near vicinity of a substantial number. Is this an observation you have made in your research? The other aspect of course is the sulphurous smell which accompanies many encounters, described as a smell consistent with electrical storms with lightning strikes. Again, is this is an element you attribute to the "electricity" involved to facilitate dimension changes?

This is all pseudoscience I know, and pure gobbeley gook to a lot of people, but the fact is, there are no clear photos of bigfoots, no bigfoot bodies, and the best we have are blatant time wasting pranks and ambiguous amorphorous images. Bigfoot taking a p!ss? No offence, it's actually a great and interesting photo I would like to hear more about. So the mere concept of bigfoot existing already lends itself to pseudoscience, as our science vehemently denies bigfoot exists, except ofcourse in people's imaginations.

Themanfromglad, I would like to continue to explore these pseudoscience concepts here with you and the applications of these concepts for practical research. One thing though, does this mean, however, I will need to purchase the book by Adrian DVIR? Being so conversant with the terminologies in that book, could it be that you are in fact Adrian DVIR and this be a clever way of promoting you book? Hmmmm, you aren't obliged to answer that last question!

[forestguy]

My understanding comes from the book "X3" by Adrian Dvir.

For the benefit of other board members, the full name of the book is "X3 - Healing, Entities, and Aliens".

Here's the self blurb given on Amazon:

A book describing ongoing aliens' medical activity in Israel and all over the globe. The aliens medical team collaborates with psychics and cures humans. The author is a psychic and describes his first-hand experiences.

http://www.amazon.com/X3-Healing-Entiti ... 9657269008

Sounds interesting, but personally there are a few more crypto books I want that are available from Amazon that I'd spend the coin on before forking over for this one.

Further info on the Author available at the links below - and Steve, if themanfromglad is Adrian, then he's posting from another dimension - Adrian died sitting in his armchair from mono in 2004:

http://etmedical.com/adrian_story.htm

http://adriandvir.tripod.com/index.htm

[themanfromglad]

Thanks! The terminologies you use feel to be from another neatly packaged pseudoscience, this time created by Adrian DVIR. Free quanta energy strings which comprise matter for instance. Would you say that is another way of saying "Chi energy" as taught in the East with the pseudoscience schools of acupuncture and martial arts? If it is, chi is a fascinating subject in it's own right as any practitioner of Tai Chi Chuan or Chi Gung will attest. It is also a force attested to be able to be felt in your own body, stored up in your body, and tapped into using visualisation and breathing techniques. In India it is called, Sanyama, the foundation of a host of rumoured spectacular feats. I can draw a number of parallels between the concepts.

There was a time when a lot of people were plotting bigfoot sightings and yowie sightings, and noting the presence of high voltage power lines in the near vicinity of a substantial number. Is this an observation you have made in your research? The other aspect of course is the sulphurous smell which accompanies many encounters, described as a smell consistent with electrical storms with lightning strikes. Again, is this is an element you attribute to the "electricity" involved to facilitate dimension changes?

This is all pseudoscience I know, and pure gobbeley gook to a lot of people, but the fact is, there are no clear photos of bigfoots, no bigfoot bodies, and the best we have are blatant time wasting pranks and ambiguous amorphorous images. Bigfoot taking a p!ss? No offence, it's actually a great and interesting photo I would like to hear more about. So the mere concept of bigfoot existing already lends itself to pseudoscience, as our science vehemently denies bigfoot exists, except ofcourse in people's imaginations.

Themanfromglad, I would like to continue to explore these pseudoscience concepts here with you and the applications of these concepts for practical research. One thing though, does this mean, however, I will need to purchase the book by Adrian DVIR? Being so conversant with the terminologies in that book, could it be that you are in fact Adrian DVIR and this be a clever way of promoting you book? Hmmmm, you aren't obliged to answer that last question!

You must having been sleeping under a very big rock for a very long time. Quantum theory is MAINSTREAM SCIENCE. You can read all about in dozens of Physics books that were written by main stream scientists. The only deviation would from those books would likely be the subset of "free" quanta strings, having properties that are attributed to anything. If you don't believe in UFO's, aliens and crop circles being their kind way of introducing their presence, then you probably should steer clear of the paranormal Bigfoot/Yowie as well.

I had a roommate who is now CEO of the largest electrical supplier in Oregon. He stated that when they put cameras on their towers at the previous utility that he worked at, they would spot Bigfoot standing beneath the wires and some sort of electrical events taking place. The Feds confirmed to them that all of the interdimensional people use the electricity in the air to recharge their batteries, at that time. Electrical appliances would probably provide a more rapid recharge.

If you are highly telepathic, a pickpocket, a thief, a burglar, or a borrower, then NO, you won't need to buy the book. If you can't afford the book, then you can't afford the gas money to go spend the night in the woods and wait for an invisible Yowie to check you out.

http://adriandvir.tripod.com/X3_order.htm

[themanfromglad]

I have had multiple field experiences around power lines, that were similar in that an invisible entity that made sound like a small electrical cloud or localized wind blowing on dry leaves when there were no leaves being blown or dust being kicked up. The sound was preceded by the sound of bipedal footsteps in the forest. I was not standing either directly beneath or even within 100 meters of the power lines. Do the math.

I have had similar experience away from power lines as well.

The book X3, covers a lot more mysterious subjects than interdimensional people. If Federal scientists discovered what was in print in that book, they would make it top secret and you would never hear about it, in my opinion.

So far on this board, I receive only questions. I have not yet heard of one single person performing field experiments to confirm my predictions. You do need excellent hearing in order to do field research. And a good memory in order to recall what was stated here.

[FM80]

They possibly can recharge their batteries from our electrical appliances. I have a couple of spirit buddies that like to hang out in close vicinity to electrical appliances like TV sets and computer screens. Batteries would be another good source for them. I suspect that the electricity is like a food substitute for them. We eat to recharge our batteries as well.

How would they have recharged before we invented electrical appliances?

[FM80]

So far on this board, I receive only questions. I have not yet heard of one single person performing field experiments to confirm my predictions.

That's the way it should be. For me personally, when I read someone's idea on the forum and to me it sounds highly unlikely, I'm in no rush to go out and try it.

I'm still concerned that to confirm your predictions one must see nothing. Many times I have been in the bush and heard noises from things I can't see, is that all?

Rather than us performing experiments to confirm your predictions, can you explain how your 'invisible bigfoot' can be recorded or observed by some sort of instrumentation? Surely they interact in some detectable way and I'm guessing you've thought about this.