masterbarber

Has Bigfoot Science Stalled? (2)

49 posts in this topic

Posted (edited)

20 minutes ago, DWA said:

 

If you set aside the anecdotes, you are left with evidence that has multiple potential sources. None of it is conclusive, and of the potential sources, the only ones ever proven are fabrication or error. Not once has the coin landed on the side of " this could only have come from an undocumented ape". Never.  It is no wonder you focus on the anecdotes. Your approach is unscientific in that it is steeped in the unfalsifiable. You prefer to focus on that which cannot be proven or disproven. This provides you with all the wiggle room you want to make your grand, but ultimately empty, proclamations. You're not fooling anyone who examines this phenomenon with a hard skeptical and scientific eye. 

 

I don't believe that bigfoot exists simply because of the gap between the thousands of reports and the utter lack of conclusive hard evidence. That gap just gets bigger the more the reports march in and no supporting evidence is provided. That you see this as a strong point belies your lack of understanding. 

Edited by dmaker
4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, ShadowBorn said:

Dmaker

Smoke does not mean fire at all ! but means that there is amber burning. This means that there is hope that there is a living entity roaming our wilderness.

an·ec·do·tal

ˌanəkˈdōdl/

adjective

adjective: anecdotal

(of an account) not necessarily true or reliable, because based on personal accounts rather than facts or research.

 

Some of us have done the research and have found for ourselves the facts of what it is that is out there. What you have done is placed your self in a single place and called it a fact that they do not exist. This is not research. Now getting to an area where a freshly reported encounter and being there to intercept the encounter your self . Well this would better your chances of knowing the truth of what is out there. It would no longer be anecdotal to you but a fact. You my friend would no longer be sitting in the skeptical chair. :) 

Shadow, again your personal truth means nothing to an objective observer. It simply cannot. I am not you. There is no guarantee that I would perceive what you did in the same way. You keep thinking that I would see what you see the same way and arrive at the same conclusion. Such is not the case. That is why anecdotes are useless in this case as evidence for existence. 

 

If one believes there to be some truth to the legend, then sure, use the reports as a starting point to head out on your investigations. If something conclusive is recovered, then I would love to adjust my position. That has not happened yet, and I don't believe that it ever will.  In the meantime, focusing on personal truths and encounter stories is going to provide for nothing more than interesting campfire stories. 

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Shadow, may I ask you a question? It's not terribly scientific, but it might speak directly to our disconnect. You seem to portray a very personal connection with bigfoot. Almost to the point of fetishism (I don't mean that as an insult, it's just a term). Do you have similar thoughts or relationships with any mundane, or documented species? Bigfoot seems to hold an almost spiritual significance for you. That is perhaps why my objectivity is at such odds with your subjectivity.  I fail to understand why bigfoot seems so personal to you.

 

 

 

Edited by dmaker
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, dmaker said:

Do you have similar thoughts or relationships with any mundane, or documented species?

Dmaker

Yes, I have it with hunting deer. I mean public land big bucks. Since those are hard to hunt unless you know how to look for them. They know hunters and can out wit us for their doe's.. The other animal that I have a great relationship with is the turkey. Being able to call them in is not an easy task and calling in a old tom on public land takes work. But I love it and have never shot at them when they came in. Just watching them fluff out is fantastic. This is how I see the Bigfoot. They might not be documented but I know that they are real. Like you said anecdotal is just stories but when there is evidence to back it up then what do we call it?

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites