Guest BIGFOOT BBQ Posted July 11, 2011 Share Posted July 11, 2011 You sure are a pleasant fellow, BF BBQ. Well, thanks! I don't think I could agree any more emphatically with both your and Big White Buffalo's ideas on the subject. Anytime someone can turn a $1000 investment into $10,000 that sounds great and I think a guy oughta jump on it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest gershake Posted July 11, 2011 Share Posted July 11, 2011 Raise your end to $150 each (against $1500 from each of them) and get them to go with 18 months. This would be my advice exactly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest BIGFOOT BBQ Posted July 11, 2011 Share Posted July 11, 2011 So... I don't need a body in order to collect, just for the Erickson footage plus the DNA evidence to be convincing. What exactly would be the criteria for deciding that "the Erickson footage plus the DNA evidence" would be 'convincing' (enough) that a winner of the bet would be determined? I mean, exactly WHO would be the arbiter? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted July 12, 2011 Share Posted July 12, 2011 What exactly would be the criteria for deciding that "the Erickson footage plus the DNA evidence" would be 'convincing' (enough) that a winner of the bet would be determined? I mean, exactly WHO would be the arbiter? We are gentlemen, BF BBQ. I described to them what the footage supposedly contained, and if it is as I described, then I win. When the time comes, I'm sure we would have had someone who did not have money on it as the arbitrator. Anyway, I don't think it's going to happen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest BIGFOOT BBQ Posted July 12, 2011 Share Posted July 12, 2011 (edited) We are gentlemen, BF BBQ. I described to them what the footage supposedly contained, and if it is as I described, then I win. When the time comes, I'm sure we would have had someone who did not have money on it as the arbitrator. Anyway, I don't think it's going to happen. I'm not asking because I believe or care that the money would change hands (or not). I'm asking because I'm curious as to what criteria a Bigfoot Believer thinks would "prove" the existence of Bigfoot -? And furthermore, what sort of standard of proof does he think others ought to accept-? Edited July 12, 2011 by BIGFOOT BBQ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest nona Posted July 12, 2011 Share Posted July 12, 2011 Here's the best part- I've described to them in detail what the Erickson Project claims to have, as well as the story of the two BFs that were killed and subsequently used as DNA donors. Of course, it just made them laugh even harder, which is what prompted one of them to offer the bet. So... I don't need a body in order to collect, just for the Erickson footage plus the DNA evidence to be convincing. They are all a bunch of dumb car salesmen (I am too, so I can say that ), so I got them ALL to jump in! They will all give me 10:1 odds on a $100 bet, which means I rake in $10k off this puppy if it pans out. I'm pretty convinced the EP is the real deal, but I'm not convinced it will be released in a year. So, any advice? Should I take it? If we were talking about a boxing match and you were betting on the underdog, I would say take it. It may be a long shot but the payout is pretty good and may warrant the risk. After all it only takes one blow to end a match. Having said that and based on everything that's been said on this board in regards to these DNA "studies", I think you might be better off dropping one grand on lottery tickets. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest BIGFOOT BBQ Posted July 12, 2011 Share Posted July 12, 2011 Having said that and based on everything that's been said on this board in regards to these DNA "studies", I think you might be better off dropping one grand on lottery tickets. Not like we haven't been pumped up and let down with grand claims of indisputable DNA evidence that didn't pan out before, is it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest DWA Posted May 26, 2017 Share Posted May 26, 2017 (edited) On 7/7/2011 at 10:22 PM, Guest said: Here's the best part- I've described to them in detail what the Erickson Project claims to have, as well as the story of the two BFs that were killed and subsequently used as DNA donors. Of course, it just made them laugh even harder, which is what prompted one of them to offer the bet. So... I don't need a body in order to collect, just for the Erickson footage plus the DNA evidence to be convincing. They are all a bunch of dumb car salesmen (I am too, so I can say that ), so I got them ALL to jump in! They will all give me 10:1 odds on a $100 bet, which means I rake in $10k off this puppy if it pans out. I'm pretty convinced the EP is the real deal, but I'm not convinced it will be released in a year. So, any advice? Should I take it? I really hope you didn't do this. I REALLY HOPE YOU DIDN'T DO THIS. The Erickson Project [facepalm] As to the generic "is bigfoot real?" I don't know of a more obvious bet to take. TAKE IT, WHOEVER OFFERS IT. There are several reasons: 1. How is he gonna win? If you can't prove a negative, how can he win, right? 2. DON'T LET HIM PUT ANY DEADLINES ON THE BET. The mainstream has shown themselves to be dunderheads on this; you are betting on their incompetence. Don't. 3. Here are the terms and accept no others: if we're still doing this in ten years OR we have confirmation of ANY nonhuman NA primate...you win. I'd toss in any nonhuman hominid, worldwide, because if the yeti or orang pendek or yeren etc. are real, count on it, this is. (If we're still doing this...the evidence is still rolling in. YOU WIN.) Seriously, if you had to bet everything, you'd have to bet on "real." There is no evidence suggesting otherwise. Who but an idiot bets against the evidence? Edited May 26, 2017 by DWA Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts