Yowiehunters Forum

Hi!

Stumbled across your site after I explored the Queen Vic Sanitorium.
Googled the place and found a couple of threads about it here.

Upfront, I don't at all believe in Yowie, Yeti, bigfoot, ghosts, ET UFOs etc. but I'm an avid urban explorer/bushwalker/photographer, usually solo - and would like to one day see something mysterious.
10 years of exploring and nothing strange yet!
Happy to share any weird stuff here if it happens

I'm also forum admin at UEGA.net - Urban Explorers Group of Australia.

Cheers!

Welcome Nuggs and bring on that healthy scepticism.

It helps keep everyone honest enough to stick to the facts - well occasionally anyway.

Thanks TP

Nuggs wrote:Hi!

Stumbled across your site after I explored the Queen Vic Sanitorium.
Googled the place and found a couple of threads about it here.

Upfront, I don't at all believe in Yowie, Yeti, bigfoot, ghosts, ET UFOs etc. but I'm an avid urban explorer/bushwalker/photographer, usually solo - and would like to one day see something mysterious.
10 years of exploring and nothing strange yet!
Happy to share any weird stuff here if it happens

I'm also forum admin at UEGA.net - Urban Explorers Group of Australia.

Cheers!

Hi Nuggs, Welcome to these forums, although I’ve only been posting for a while myself.
I read just about everything on this site, for a few years before I ever posted anything.

Sometimes you will read things that are beyond belief and other times plenty of things that
make sense by people that are well read in their chosen field.

It’s the abstract nature of some ideas juxtaposed with what TB calls ‘healthy scepticism’ that
makes it so interesting. Like chess or a board game where beliefs are pushed forward with a
few facts then another player moves in with a counter claim and a few facts and repositions
the discourse and claims sovereignty over an aspect of it; at least for a while.

Posts seem to fall into two camps; those with an opinion and those with something qualitative
to contribute, such as committed field researchers.

You say in your post that 'Upfront, I don't at all believe in Yowies'. I know it’s only a figure of
speech, but it indicates that you may have two sceptic hats: one concrete and one a bit rubbery.

Please don’t take it as a criticism, as I've spent a long time examining my own beliefs and
degrees of scepticism that I have. Lets say from an early age my bs meter has always been
turned up to 11 out of 10, so I would be the last person to frequent a site like this.

The debate in these forums isn’t about whether the Yowie exists but about their behaviour:
like nest building, rock clacking, rock stacking, foot stomping, tree peaking, grunting, roaring,
howling, honking, screaming, farting, symbol making, tree seats, rock throwing and the
occasional decapitation of native animals and family pets….....that’s just the start.

What discussion could be more interesting then that, you said you liked a bit of adventure.

It’s about something beyond our day to day lives; which is usually a mythology a few thousand
years old; forget that, this is our own true blue legend of a creature all our own and
it’s happening today in bushland near you. Not in the Outback or the Antarctic but just here
on the East Coast, in the aussie bush we all love and fear.

Visitors to this site have to understand that some members have had life changing experiences
with what we know as the Yowie. Its existence can always be debated by the sceptics but one
concrete fact remains and that is that many people have experienced the same kind of thing
with a similar type of creature over many decades............so what does that tell us ?

That UEGA group sounds interesting, sounds like your developing urban stealth like instincts in
your activities. Don't forget to go bush occasionally, so you can be remindered of your more
ancient primal instincts..........maybe at night time, by yourself.


T.

Thats a great post Tuckeroo. Nuggs you will find some weird and far out theories on here. I used to think yowies were b.s too. Theres members of this forum who will take non believers out to see the yowies if you're keen.

Thanks heaps for the reply Tuck, very thorough!
Will read again

Was in QLD camping at Cressbrook on the weekend.
Wild dogs howling for a while, but nothing else notable. Was a great couple of nights, and not too cold.

I too would like to welcome Nuggs and also commend Tuckeroo's comprehensive post. Think it sums up nicely what this group is all about.

Nuggs said: "Upfront, I don't at all believe in Yowie, Yeti, bigfoot, ghosts, ET UFOs etc."
Wow... that's strong! Sounds like what the president of the Skeptics Association would say.

Nuggs... all I can say is I sincerely hope this forum can help enlighten you as to the reality of an unknown hominoid called the Yowie out there in the Australian bush. We don't know what is is...but we do know it is real. It helps if you approach all the evidence with an open mind. The Audio Reports are a great place to start and there are some good Video Reports as well. It takes a lot of time and effort to do research, but it's the only way to have an informed opinion on a subject like the Yowie.

It will probably take weeks or even months to go through them all and when you finish, I 'd really like to know if all the emotional testimonies from eyewitness's have managed to change your mindset a bit. Just a little doubt now, perhaps?

I would also like to ask why you are a total non-believer in UFO's. That intrigues me! Have you ever looked into the subject closely? The evidence of hundreds of thousands of case files over the last say, 70 years is so strong as to be absolutely overwhelming! I have been constantly researching the reality of unidentified craft in our skies for more decades than I care to remember.

Mate... not having a go at your beliefs in any way, but I am seriously interested in what draws you to that conclusion. Hope to hear from you soon. Cheers.

Hey Searcher,

No probs!
My non belief in ET UFOs I suppose comes down to the fact that a LOT of accounts can be explained by simpler means, without resoting to aliens.
Even the ones that cannot be explained should not be classified as ET just because there is no explaination!

In summary: A truly unexplained UFO is just that.
There is no need to embellish without further info.

Yowie bait wrote:Thats a great post Tuckeroo. Nuggs you will find some weird and far out theories on here. I used to think yowies were b.s too. Theres members of this forum who will take non believers out to see the yowies if you're keen.

Cheers YB

Nuggs wrote:
In summary: A truly unexplained UFO is just that.
There is no need to embellish without further info.

I have a feeling you might have missed some things that go along with the UFO phenomenon, but that's just me, feelings just rule me sometimes.

Observations of craft on radar with military jets scrambled to intercept.
Manoeuvres that defy physics.
Physical evidence left behind at landing sites.
Abduction Phenomena.
Physical evidence left behind on encounter and abduction victims.
Contactee phenomena.
Animal multilations.
Higher than high military classification - Roswell incident still has a higher security classification than the latest nuclear warhead designs (for what reason?).

There's more but that's enough to go on with.
People kinda want answers a little better than - "well I dunno".

Add the fact that some serious researchers (astronomers, physicists, psychiatrists, etc) have done the hard work to wade through the misidentifications and the deliberate story telling and hoaxes to find there is a core of legitimate data at the heart of this phenomena.

It is not embellishment to suggest an intergalactic source for the phenomena observed, it is called developing a hypothesis (in this case the Extra-terrestrial Hypothesis ETH). Another working hypothesis is the inter-dimensional being hypothesis (IDH). It is good to have more than one working hypothesis at the same time in cases like this where we are still waiting for vital pieces of evidence to complete the puzzle and either confirm or deny our suggested hypothesis.

It's standard practice in science.

Do some reading. You will love it. I dare ya!!!

>>It is not embellishment to suggest an intergalactic source for the phenomena observed...<<

I can agree with that TP, however - such a suggestion is far from a rational explanation.
To say "We don't know" is more correct than is asserting a claim which cannot be ascertained...yet.

It reminds me of that guy on History Channel "Ancient Aliens", who became infamous due to his eagerness to explain ANY unknown, as evidence of aliens.

As for government cover-ups: around the 50's and 60's the US were developing top secret craft that were inconceivable to the public of that day - incl VTOL, supersonic flight. And the computer had barely been invented!
It would not be surprise me at all that there may be the same happenings in the current day - but much more advanced.

Point 1. Extraordinary claims do require extraordinary evidence to back them up.

Point 2. Absence of a worldly explanation does not automatically mean "Aliens".

Point 3. A government cover-up does not necessarily mean "aliens" either.

Point 4. My signature!


Hope I cleard up my position a bit better, and I do welcome any critique

Nuggs wrote: I can agree with that TP, however - such a suggestion is far from a rational explanation.
To say "We don't know" is more correct than is asserting a claim which cannot be ascertained...yet.

This suggests some things to me but correct me if I'm off the mark here.

INTERPRETING THE EVIDENCE
If you always require an explanation that is "rational" then you will never break out of the rut of current knowledge and discover anything new. For an explanation to be rational, it must fit with what is currently understood. So if I am reading you right you would prefer an explanation that is not "out of the ordinary". This tells me you have already set boundaries for your thinking on the subject and will thus tend to interpret evidence in a way that stays within those boundaries.

This is a form of cognitive bias that I have heard called "The Status Quo Bias", but no doubt it has other names.

On the other side of that coin is something called "Confirmation Bias". This is where you have a favourite theory and you interpret the evidence in a way that confirms your theory. This can even happen at an unconscious level, as can Status Quo bias. Without saying too much, people on this forum should be no stranger to confirmation bias.

So interpreting the evidence has it's challenges, however, before you even get to that point you need to be looking at what is evidence and what is not, what has been reported correctly and what is false, which opinions can be trusted and which cannot.

THINK CAREFULLY. JUDGE UNEMOTIONALLY
I think you might be lumping all the people who talk about aliens into the same basket and that would be a grave mistake. In my last post I mention just some of the factors that make up the entirety of the UFO phenomenon. It is far larger than just an unknown object in the sky. That alone should give you pause for thought and re-evaluation. Considering how much data there is to cover I feel comfortable in saying that a majority of people read, watch and experience only a little and then expound an iron-clad belief far too readily. Another thing they do is take note of the hoaxes, the blatantly stupid and the criminally opinionated members of society and assume that we are all like that.

They never suspect for example that we might be intimately familiar with the Ancient Aliens series, having researched it and found it to be soundly debunked. Thanks for bringing that up by the way.
It might also pass unnoticed that serious researchers are well aware that Zecharia Sitchin couldn't read cuneiform if his life depended on it. Here is a start - Sitchin Is Wrong

This post is getting long so I will wrap up, although I could go on for pages yet.

I guess what I am saying is please be careful not to fall prey to bias just like the "believers" often do.
Get acquainted with scientific methods and the people who use them and you will be able to separate the noisy blowhards from those who actually have data and logic to back up their claims.
Appreciate that some have learned to ask critical questions of everything first, such as (random example) asking how did psychiatrist John E. Mack safeguard his analysis techniques from the pitfalls of suggested memories associated with regression hypnosis therapy, etc., when interviewing hundreds of supposed alien abductees from a clinical psychology perspective?

This is the level that the best researchers go to in an attempt to get to the best collection of facts that they can. From there it is a well recognised technique (1890's would you believe) that to be honest with the data, every reasonable explanation should be examined simultaneously. The Method of Multiple Working Hypotheses.
In the current example of UFO's that would include things like the Extra-terrestrial Hypothesis, Inter-dimensional Hypothesis, Naturally occurring phenomena, mass hypnosis, secret military craft, etc.

The defining judgement should not be "is it rational", but must always be "what best fits the data", otherwise you are just being dishonest with the material, no matter which side of the argument you find yourself on.

Anyway, thanks for the dialogue Nuggs, you've been great and I have waffled on for way to long. I will leave it there and leave the final word up to you and others.
Thanks for putting up with me.

Great post TP, and thank you.


Trouble is, there is so little evidence that could be considered "good" among the many hoaxes and fabrications.

If there is no conclusion (due to lack of sufficient evidence), that's not a bias - it's logic.

I prefer to keep an open mind.

But holding logical conclusions in contempt, in favor of your preferred conclusion is basically the definition of confirmation bias.


Cheers

G’day Nuggs. You say there is “so little evidence”. Have you ever sat down and watched these three videos listed together below? If you haven’t, I suggest you check out the first hand eyewitness testimonies. They are extremely compelling. Let's know what you think after viewing them.

The first one is “I Know What I Saw” and the opening story deals with the famous Phoenix Lights. In March, 2007 as many as 10,000 people, including the Governor of Arizona watched a giant chevron shape craft estimated at over a MILE wide cruise slowly and silently across the state. This actually happened and no one should put their head in the sand and try to deny it. It is better to ask : “what on earth was that!”

The second two videos are the Disclosure Project’s address to the National Press Club in Washington. In the first, over twenty highly credentialed military, intelligence, government, corporate and scientific witnesses came forward at the National Press Club in Washington, DC to establish the reality of UFOs or extraterrestrial vehicles, extraterrestrial life forms, and resulting advanced energy and propulsion technologies. It was a ground breaking moment that resonated around the world.

In the second video, even more military and Intelligence people put their reputations on the line to come forward, all prepared to testify under oath to the United States Congress that UFO’s are real. Heady stuff indeed!

The Disclosure Project is a research project working to fully disclose the facts about UFOs, extraterrestrial intelligence, and classified advanced energy and propulsion systems.

They now have over 500 government, military, and intelligence community witnesses testifying to their direct, personal, first hand experience with UFOs, ETs, ET technology, and the cover-up that keeps this information secret. You can be 100% certain that ALL these highly professional people are NOT making up stories! And Nuggs, no doubt you are completely unaware of all this incredible information!

Check some of them out at: https://www.youtube.com/user/csetiweb/v ... =0&sort=dd

There is only one logical conclusion that can be drawn: ET visitors are here… and the US Government knows a lot more than they are telling the public!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4I4tKI2Ea-U
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lkswXVmG4xM&lr=1
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3jUU4Z8QdHI

I am thinking these posts should rightfully be in AYR’s UFO section, so I will double post this there under “ARE UFO’s REAL?”. May get some more contributions. Perhaps Trevor should copy over his last post as he made some excellent points!