Concerning The Ongoing Debate Over Skeptic /scofftic/denialist Participation On The Bff And Proving Bigfoot's Existence

[salubrious]

 

The BFF is open to anyone who can follow the rules and conduct themselves in a respectful manner. If you feel a member(s) is personally annoying, use the ignore feature. If you feel someone is violating a rule, use the report feature at the bottom of each post. The staff on this forum do an outstanding job but they are not mind readers.

 

And let me say this-  If you are an individual who believes that Bigfoot does not and cannot exist, you log on for the sole purpose of reading the content and mocking the membership here and elsewhere....I can tell you that there is a growing intolerance to that mindset on this forum. 

I am one of those with a growing intolerance.    I have no problem with a skeptic fence sitter because at one point I was one,  before I started doing field work to find out for myself.  These people are for the most part healthy for the forum by questioning evidence,  giving their opinion where the truth could go either way,  and serve to balance the true believers who don't seem to have any evidence.     I do have a problem to those that never seem to remember proponent posts,  blow off evidence,   name call,  constantly quote mine,   post graphics with no connection to the thread topic,   and dance around the rules with false accusations.   They are not here to learn anything or contribute but by their own admission seek to convert people to their denialist view or get some sick thrill out of mocking those that believe differently.      Mocking, degrading  and conversion attempts are hostile actions directed at other members and have no place in a fair and equitable forum.    

 

-And if you run into that, please report it.

 

This is a big site, with thousands of threads and only a few of us staff to moderate it.

 

I'm active on a lot of sites. This site has an extremely good set of rules to prevent it from being over-run by trolls and also to allow fair and honest discourse. The rules also don't take sides. But there are only so many moderators and try as we like, we can't police the site all the time- we are on a volunteer basis. So we need your help- if you see a problem, report it. That is what makes the site work- not the moderation, but the participation of the members.

[Guest Crowlogic]

The skeptic/scoftic contigent can be banished , burned and scorned until the cows come home and most likely it will be.  The proponent wagons have circled and are releasing their salvos.  That is fine it's to be expected.  However after all the ammunition has been fired and after the smoke has cleared the non believer/skeptic/ scoftics still control the high ground in that there is no proof that bigfoot exists outside of the belief system of bigfootism.  The world at large  still lacks the very thing that would drive the point home of it's existence and we all know that it is a type specimen.

 

In the meantime the lunatic fringe shows no signs of abating and the so called serious core is without it's type specimen.  If I were going to plan a sabotage of a belief system I would approach it exactly the way  Mathew Johnston is going.  He starts out as a learned professional person of letters and makes some articulate intelligently presented videos that even we scoftics can appreciate.  Then after establishing his credentials he suddenly throws the switch and now his in the cab of the locomotive at the head of the woo train barreling down the main line and into the roundhouse of bigfootism.  So sure let's all play nice in the sandbox but exactly how seriously can a belief system be taken when stuff like I just mentioned goes on all the time.  

[Bodhi]

Yes Rockape...Ain't he precious?.

Is this another of your self indulgent posts you write to "stir up the animus" as you mentioned in post 8 of this thread? Back on ignore for you.

[WSA]

I will just say this about that ^^^ I can tolerate a whole lot, and do, as do many others here . But, everyone has limits. The first time somebody in a thread discussing putative evidence makes a statement as to how they don't need to discuss it because there is no such thing as evidence of BF, my tolerance ends. My authority is nothing less than the stated purpose of this forum. Anyone care to join me in that?

[hiflier]

Hello Crowlogic,

 

Good post. And I mean that too. You articulated a lot of what's wrong with Bigfootism. And in truth a lot of us, well me anyway 'cause that's all I can speak for, KNOW the problems that beset the subject. Complaints are lodged regarding hoaxers, bad videos, blobsquatches, red circles around shadows in woods, pariedolia, you name it. Bigfootdom has it's problems to be sure.

 

But there are witness reports, footprint casts, odd sounds, tree noises, killed animals, hassled farms, and other phenomenon that yes, could be hoaxed, but in a lot I don't think it is hoaxed. Now what exactly is causing all the evidence is something else altogether. So one has to start somewhere with the whole thing. Trusting the veracity of witness reports, and those here who say they've seen such a creature is a beginning only. If the traces of evidence is compelling enough then what's to be done?

 

I see many actually trying to get out there and settle this once and for all. Real or not real. Rule it in or rule out. That to me is what the Forum is all about. The battleground it becomes sometimes is a no-win situation for either side's extreme elements. You know it, the proponents know it and all those in between know it. Why it persists then is beyond me.

 

Anyway, I enjoyed your post.

Edited August 26, 2015 by hiflier

[ohiobill]

We could draw him a picture...

I'd be delighted to see some of your original artwork but I’d be thrilled if you would just answer a question any professional ecologist should be able to answer...one put to you but never answered. How long should it take to definitively answer whether or not an apex predator exists? Say a bipedal ape weighing 300-800 lbs, standing 9 feet tall and who regularly visits the cabin you are staying in on a 10 acre parcel in OK?

 

That seems to be what this is mainly about, hurt feelings over bipto leaving. Area X - 14 years of study, no evidence brought forward, just anecdotes. Drama punctuated occasionally by events like the Echo incident and a tree falling. Add a hateful farewell with potshots taken at the staff and volunteers who actually make the BFF work and a childish attempt to draw an analogy between skeptics and a parasitic river fluke with continued potshots toward the staff and moderators here. This is really something we want to fight about? If questions brought forward by skeptics and proponents are too hard we should limit them so Brian Brown can tell his story his way? Not just his way on his podcasts or his website or his blog but here?

 

This isn't a children's squatch league where all participants get a ribbon solely for participation. It's a forum to talk about bigfoot and talk about possible evidence with pointed questions as per the guidelines we all supposedly read and agreed to before joining. 

 

There are plenty of parasites in the bigfoot world but they are all human and they’re usually proponents or knowers not skeptics. They prey upon other humans and take money and time away. They have names like Dyer, Carter, Coy, Patterson and Biscardi. They tell stories that get uncovered by questions asked here among other places. That’s why the ability to ask pointed questions was covered by the rules in the first place. Without that ability we might as well just listen to Tales of Enoch on audio and say, yup, that’s possible.

[Guest DWA]

Um, yep, I'm down.

 

I really don't care what someone thinks...until he is loudly broadcasting it over and over and over and making not Effort One to consider all the possible ways he might be wrong, which, um, no thanks, we have, and yes, we do every single minute of every day...just the evidence gives us zero reason to worry about the possibility, not that we worry, because we aren't invested in a rigid fact-free belief system the way, you know, some are.

[Bodhi]

Um, yep, I'm down.

 

I really don't care what someone thinks...until he is loudly broadcasting it over and over and over and making not Effort One to consider all the possible ways he might be wrong, which, um, no thanks, we have, and yes, we do every single minute of every day...just the evidence gives us zero reason to worry about the possibility, not that we worry, because we aren't invested in a rigid fact-free belief system the way, you know, some are.

word salad??

[Rockape]

Um, yep, I'm down.

 

I really don't care what someone thinks...until he is loudly broadcasting it over and over and over and making not Effort One to consider all the possible ways he might be wrong, which, um, no thanks, we have, and yes,

Look in the mirror when you say that big fella.

 

Um, yep, I'm down.

 

I really don't care what someone thinks...until he is loudly broadcasting it over and over and over and making not Effort One to consider all the possible ways he might be wrong, which, um, no thanks, we have, and yes, we do every single minute of every day...just the evidence gives us zero reason to worry about the possibility, not that we worry, because we aren't invested in a rigid fact-free belief system the way, you know, some are.

word salad??

 

Dmaker used to call it "word soup", maybe that made it more palatable, for him anyway.

Edited August 26, 2015 by Rockape

[WSA]

I see the discussion in this thread dedicated to the proposition that the insistence of arguing existence/non-existence is corroding the tenor of our discussions is, well, corroding the tenor of our discussion.

Edited August 26, 2015 by WSA

[Rockape]

 

We could draw him a picture...

I'd be delighted to see some of your original artwork but I’d be thrilled if you would just answer a question any professional ecologist should be able to answer...one put to you but never answered. How long should it take to definitively answer whether or not an apex predator exists? Say a bipedal ape weighing 300-800 lbs, standing 9 feet tall and who regularly visits the cabin you are staying in on a 10 acre parcel in OK?

I'd say that's a personal decision, one which I reached about that particular subject a long time back. I did not however feel the need to post about it like my life depended on convincing everyone one else my opinion is the correct one.

 

 

I see the discussion in this thread dedicated to the proposition that the insistence of arguing existence/non-existence is corroding the tenor of our discussions is, well, corroding the tenor of our discussion.

We're scheduling a group hug later. Except for Cotter.

[salubrious]

 after the smoke has cleared the non believer/skeptic/ scoftics still control the high ground in that there is no proof that bigfoot exists outside of the belief system of bigfootism.

 

Actually there is proof but you have consistently ignored it or dismissed it, not sure which. I've pointed it out to you on a number of occasions yet you continue to post as if nothing happened. Paramount in that, you've never refuted my point.

[Rockape]

Sorry Sal, no proof. Evidence? Yes, but no proof.

[salubrious]

Oh the proof is easy enough. But you have to take the time to do the analysis.

[hiflier]

Hello Rockape,

 

...We're scheduling a group hug later. Except for Cotter.

Well heck, count me in for tha............NNNNAAAAAAH!

Hello salubrious,

 

Oh the proof is easy enough. But you have to take the time to do the analysis.

What a refreshing thought In actuality you have made a very subtle but strong statement. If one out of the hundreds of "trusted" footprint casts isn't hoaxed then yes, there's proof. Yep. It may seem like small potatoes to only have one valid footprint out of all of them but then? One is all it would take. A thousand hoaxes and one not. Sticking to the notion that there's proof aready and that it's not just a notion takes guts. I've just learned something here.

Edited August 26, 2015 by hiflier