gigantor

Tech
  • Content count

    4,913
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by gigantor

  1. We can play round-a-bout all you want. It won't work for you because your logic is flawed. The disappointing part is that you know it , so I have to question your intellectual honesty at this point.
  2. You are positing an argument from ignorance by trying to claim a false dichotomy. Here, read it again: Argument from ignorance (from Latin: argumentum ad ignorantiam), also known as appeal to ignorance (in which ignorance represents "a lack of contrary evidence"), is a fallacy in informal logic. It asserts that a proposition is true because it has not yet been proven false (or vice versa). This represents a type of false dichotomy in that it excludes a third option, which is that: there may have been an insufficient investigation, and therefore there is insufficient information to prove the proposition be either true or false. Nor does it allow the admission that the choices may in fact not be two (true or false), but may be as many as four, true false unknown between true or false being unknowable (among the first three).[1] --------------------- You are trying to claim that a single study designed to detect carnivorous animals in a limited area, has failed to detect an omnivore animal as proof that said omnivore does not exist. Just to try to help you realize your fallacy, I'm gonna claim that BF is 30 miles south of where the cameras in the study are placed and that is why it was not detected.
  3. Nice try to dodge, but no cigar. So I'll answer your question: Obviously, not in the immediate, very limited area that the cameras were installed and cover. Say, 30 miles south of their position.
  4. Argument from Ignorance Argument from ignorance (from Latin: argumentum ad ignorantiam), also known as appeal to ignorance (in which ignorance represents "a lack of contrary evidence"), is a fallacy in informal logic. It asserts that a proposition is true because it has not yet been proven false (or vice versa). This represents a type of false dichotomy in that it excludes a third option, which is that: there may have been an insufficient investigation, and therefore there is insufficient information to prove the proposition be either true or false. Nor does it allow the admission that the choices may in fact not be two (true or false), but may be as many as four, true false unknown between true or false being unknowable (among the first three).[1] --------------------- At this point in time, I'm going with #3.
  5. yeah, So what? Finish your claim, what does that prove?
  6. We have about five cameras and a couple of sound recorders. No big deal. We've captured most of the animals known to exist in the area. C1-Coyote.mp4 bobcat.mp4
  7. WVFooter and I do have our WV Trailcam project. This is year four and no bigfoot. Yet, it happens there is a theorem which posits the impossibility of proving a negative... so there's that piece of scientific principle that keeps us going (plus its a lot of fun going out in the woods looking for evidence). I suggest to my fellow skeptics to check your first principles before foolishly thundering forward with a fallacy.
  8. I hears some knocks too.
  9. Welcome to the BFF 7.62. I have a thread in the premium section with a parts list for my setup. I leave it recording continuously until the memory card gets full, it's the limiting factor at this time. It records about 350 hours. There is also a discussion "In The Field" forum about this, with people posting their excellent recording contraptions --> here.
  10. yup, take some of the knocks we've recorded for example. It could certainly be some human just messing around, even hoaxing us. But I'm certain that ain't a cheek popping sound... Knocks With One Loud One - amped.mp3
  11. It's not plausible to attribute a good knock to a mouth popping sound. The volume is just not there. Most of the interesting knocks may not have been made by a BF, but I'm sure they weren't made by a cheek popping sound. Its just not loud enough.
  12. Interesting SY.... could there be somebody hoaxing you?
  13. I agree with Sasfooty... other young animals know instinctively to be quiet when danger is about, its wired in their brains. I watched a nature special the other night "growing wild". The sage grouse, deer and most other animals that are exposed to predators, just know to hide, stay still and be quiet on command from the mother. They have this instinct from birth, no training required and rely on their ability to blend in with their surroundings.
  14. Thanks for posting the videos TritonTr196, but I didn't see a BF anywhere... it looks like you guys were standing on top of a road bridge, I see the guardrails and all. Maybe you can post a still of the figure so we can all see it.
  15. Yeah, right. You have not just one, but a bunch of them tracked down and could get a type specimen any time you wanted, you just love them too much... That's the weakest excuse there is.
  16. and where can we see these?
  17. If it has bats in them, no (in MD, VA and WV). But even if they could, the owners have been informed and don't want to hurt the bats, why would they? The NSS does in fact have caves that you can access without bats, in other states... and those are mapped with Lidar. Every square inch is being mapped and there ain't no BF in them.
  18. All I know for sure is that in MD, VA and WV you go to jail for entering a cave without permission from the proper authorities, and they ain't handing those out easily. It's that simple.
  19. I have to say these are very, very interesting. The above explanation won't fly in this case. Thanks to Paul Graves for documenting everything so well, it really lends credibility to the find. Great job!
  20. I'm curious to see what members think about the status of BF as a species. Please do explain why you voted the way you did.
  21. Oh, that's just an artifact of the auto scaling of the x-axis in the plotting routine... the chart is only so wide and the plot lines don't always divide evenly, so the software overlaps some. But your reasoning of a BF family cycle is interesting. Think of the what the cycle is like: 1) Big Daddy finds a mate and knocks her up. 2) Party is over, time to lay low and take care of baby 3) The juvi grows up and Big Daddy kicks him out 4) Teen goes wild, Big Daddy gets busy again, lots of activity 5) Teen finds mate and settles down. Big Daddy knocks her up again. The question is how long is that cycle?
  22. Is this what you mean? But 3 years is not enough for a juvi to be kicked out, maybe its a 6 or 8 year cycle... shoot, it could be a 12 year cycle!
  23. Now that you mention it... those mini-bubbles do look cyclical. But what could it be? I know, El Nino warm years!