Rockape Posted June 2, 2017 Share Posted June 2, 2017 5 hours ago, dmaker said: Aside from seeing one? No. The current evidence should not cause anyone to believe that bigfoot exists. Anecdotes should not be a reason to believe something like this, especially when there is no good reason why there isn't more solid evidence. I know how faulty human perception can be. I know how dishonest humans can be. And I know that hallucinations and delusional thoughts are a very real thing. Therefore, I will never be moved by anecdotes. Someone else seeing a bigfoot is not a good reason to believe bigfoot exists. Ok, thanks, and I don't mean to move the goal posts on you but my question was actually poorly worded. It should have been, do you think there is good reason for someone to think BF MIGHT exist? In other words, not to think they do exist, but to keep an open mind on the subject. And again, I realized the subject is a closed book for you. I'm not asking for your own opinion, but that do you understand why some have not reached that same conclusion as yourself, nor that they do indeed exist. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dmaker Posted June 2, 2017 Share Posted June 2, 2017 (edited) 8 hours ago, Rockape said: do you think there is good reason for someone to think BF MIGHT exist? No. It's a hard question to answer since I only have one perception and one mindset: mine. If I thought there was reasonable grounds to consider that bigfoot might exist for someone else, that would have to apply to me as well. But I don't understand how anyone could consider the current state of evidence a good reason to think bigfoot might exist. But that has to be influenced by my own opinion. If I thought something was reasonable for one person to think, why would I also not think it reasonable for myself? I am no more special than the next person. I can't separate the two. Does that make sense? Edited June 2, 2017 by dmaker Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rockape Posted June 2, 2017 Share Posted June 2, 2017 > If I thought something was reasonable for one person to think, why would I also not think it reasonable for myself? I am no more special than the next person. I can't separate the two. Does that make sense? < Fair enough. True, I suppose. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FarArcher Posted June 5, 2017 Share Posted June 5, 2017 On 6/1/2017 at 7:02 PM, dmaker said: Aside from seeing one? No. The current evidence should not cause anyone to believe that bigfoot exists. Anecdotes should not be a reason to believe something like this, especially when there is no good reason why there isn't more solid evidence. I know how faulty human perception can be. I know how dishonest humans can be. And I know that hallucinations and delusional thoughts are a very real thing. Therefore, I will never be moved by anecdotes. Someone else seeing a bigfoot is not a good reason to believe bigfoot exists. I'm real curious. I don't believe in leprechauns. I don't believe they exist, and I don't believe they have a pot of gold. But I don't hang around leprechaun sites, and regurgitate hundreds of times in many different forms - my disbelief and the reasons for my disbelief. I don't state anything about those who have reported seeing them being guilty of mistaken identities, errors in identification, delusions, errors in perception, etc., etc. I just don't go there. There's no upside. Nothing to be accomplished. You don't believe, you say there's no scientific evidence, and suggest hallucinations or outright dishonesty - none of which really matters one way or the other. So. What's your game here? 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest DWA Posted June 5, 2017 Share Posted June 5, 2017 He's trying to save us from ourselves Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest DWA Posted June 5, 2017 Share Posted June 5, 2017 BTW, FarArcher, do you know how many times that question has been put to the scoftics here? Know their response? [crickets] I just put the fanatics on Ignore, and onward science. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dmaker Posted June 5, 2017 Share Posted June 5, 2017 (edited) wrong thread post. Edited June 5, 2017 by dmaker Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FarArcher Posted June 5, 2017 Share Posted June 5, 2017 4 hours ago, DWA said: He's trying to save us from ourselves That's funny, but I don't think that's what it really is. Remember on the playground during recess? Different groups started different games - basketball, four-square, touch football, maybe some softball? Everyone would be having fun and then this one snot-nosed kid would wander up, and start calling fouls, making up rules, telling everyone what was allowed, what wasn't, and just dictating from their self-perceived, elevated position? Finally, you'd go over and kick his a **, rather butt, he'd run to teacher? That's what we got here. Another intolerant know-it-all, who can't use simple principles of science, understand simple principles of evidence, and wants to make up his own rules. Pitiful. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
7.62 Posted June 5, 2017 Share Posted June 5, 2017 35 minutes ago, FarArcher said: That's funny, but I don't think that's what it really is. Remember on the playground during recess? Different groups started different games - basketball, four-square, touch football, maybe some softball? Everyone would be having fun and then this one snot-nosed kid would wander up, and start calling fouls, making up rules, telling everyone what was allowed, what wasn't, and just dictating from their self-perceived, elevated position? Finally, you'd go over and kick his a **, rather butt, he'd run to teacher? That's what we got here. Another intolerant know-it-all, who can't use simple principles of science, understand simple principles of evidence, and wants to make up his own rules. Pitiful. He must have believed at one point ..? He has over 5000 posts , no one would have that many posts and hang out on a forum just to tell everyone the creature doesn't exist and we all just imagine any encounter we have . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FarArcher Posted June 5, 2017 Share Posted June 5, 2017 Think about that. 5,000 posts, telling everyone why they're delusional, mistaken, or fabricating what they experienced. 5,000 posts, stipulating what constitutes evidence. 5,000 posts, suggesting everyone's doing everything wrong - and suggesting that some can't read simple sign. Either paid, or click baiting. No other sane, rational, prudent person would do this much work otherwise. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest DWA Posted June 5, 2017 Share Posted June 5, 2017 (edited) I think he said once that if he ever ran into one of those corner preachers ranting on and on about some nonsense, he'd plant himself on another corner and counter-rant. For how many years I don't think got laid out. I'd listen for a couple, laugh and go up the street for ice cream. Or tell him bravo if I agreed with him, then, ice cream. Maybe those things after "No other..." don't apply in certain cases... I honestly think some people hold themselves to be Fulcra of Truth, and the sole opponents to the intellectual Enemies At The Gates. And this becomes for them some kind of holy crusade. And then the above applies. I guess. Edited June 5, 2017 by DWA Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
7.62 Posted June 5, 2017 Share Posted June 5, 2017 I don't want this to appear as a dog pile on dmaker so I'll bow out but if he wants to respond to my question on being a believer at one point I would like to hear his response . Some thing brought him to this website ?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
norseman Posted June 5, 2017 Author Share Posted June 5, 2017 3 hours ago, FarArcher said: That's funny, but I don't think that's what it really is. Remember on the playground during recess? Different groups started different games - basketball, four-square, touch football, maybe some softball? Everyone would be having fun and then this one snot-nosed kid would wander up, and start calling fouls, making up rules, telling everyone what was allowed, what wasn't, and just dictating from their self-perceived, elevated position? Finally, you'd go over and kick his a **, rather butt, he'd run to teacher? That's what we got here. Another intolerant know-it-all, who can't use simple principles of science, understand simple principles of evidence, and wants to make up his own rules. Pitiful. I don't think he is making up any rules. He is just stating the ones this field doesn't want to hear. We do need physical evidence for science to take this seriously. Blood, hair, scat, tissue, saliva. Etc. Im not faulting Branco for not finding any, and I think it's very cool that he is out beating the bushes. And I enjoyed his report. If we are going to prove this animal real? We need more Branco's in the field! BFF 1.0 had a skeptics corner, I've suggested in the past that like the woo woo crowd, skeptics could have their own spot on this forum (2.0) to hash it out with believers. The idea was shot down. So regardless of your opinion of skeptics they are allowed on this forum and they can question the validity of reports, photos, video, etc. And Dmaker is a paying customer on top of it (as a premium member) as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dmaker Posted June 5, 2017 Share Posted June 5, 2017 1 hour ago, 7.62 said: I don't want this to appear as a dog pile on dmaker so I'll bow out but if he wants to respond to my question on being a believer at one point I would like to hear his response . Some thing brought him to this website ?? I'm happy to answer your question. I have stated this here in the past, but it's buried in long dead threads. I was originally brought to the this topic in adulthood due to Finding Bigfoot. I also liked being scared by the idea of bigfoot as a child and remember my Dad taking me to see the In Search Of motion picture. I maintained no real interest in the topic other than just generally thinking the idea was kind of cool and if I happened across a documentary on the TV, I would stop and watch it. I knew nothing of the subject matter beyond what I saw on documentaries. It wasn't until I stumbled across an episode of Finding Bigfoot where you had people acting and talking as if the animal was real and discovered and documented. I thought, " wow, bigfoot has been discovered?" I was surprised at the lack of fanfare, but still didn't realize that people would go on tv and talk as if something was proven that was not. So I went to the web to see if, indeed, bigfoot had been proven real. Of course, it had not. But my initial searches brought to many places, this forum being one of them. I read many reports. Ordered several bigfoot books by the phd proponents (Meldrum and Bindernagel). I read many threads here. Watched many more documentaries. Long story short, I became more swayed by the skeptical commentary than by the proponent. I am not impressed by anecdotes and all of the physical evidence offered so far does not require a sasquatch as an explanation. I still participate in the debate because I think it is important for some people to see both points of view. I know that certain skeptics, now long gone, had a strong influence on me when I first arrived here. That's basically the short version. I was never a believer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FarArcher Posted June 5, 2017 Share Posted June 5, 2017 38 minutes ago, norseman said: I don't think he is making up any rules. He is just stating the ones this field doesn't want to hear. We do need physical evidence for science to take this seriously. Blood, hair, scat, tissue, saliva. Etc. Im not faulting Branco for not finding any, and I think it's very cool that he is out beating the bushes. And I enjoyed his report. If we are going to prove this animal real? We need more Branco's in the field! BFF 1.0 had a skeptics corner, I've suggested in the past that like the woo woo crowd, skeptics could have their own spot on this forum (2.0) to hash it out with believers. The idea was shot down. So regardless of your opinion of skeptics they are allowed on this forum and they can question the validity of reports, photos, video, etc. And Dmaker is a paying customer on top of it (as a premium member) as well. What physical evidence? You gotta have a body - I know - we all know you gotta have a body. I don't need a body. I've already seen one. Nice, up close, and wish I'd never seen it. So while I don't have what YOU would term, 'physical evidence,' I DO take them serious - as that thing startled the crap out of me. Then, they had to jack around with us the remaining weeks we were up there. You and I have probably never agreed on anything - and I'm fine with that. I never suggested skeptics not be allowed on this forum. I'm just questioning the motivation of what I assume to be a grown man to invest so much time and energy - just to repeat the same mantra - as by rote - and for what purpose? I think we can all stipulate that d is a bone-deep skeptic - and beyond that, what's the use in him repeating himself? I think we can all stipulate that you want to kill one or see a body for your satisfaction. So, anyone got anything new to add? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts