Leaderboard

Ok, I just finished reading this thread (wow, it's a long one, and I had been skipping over it for some time now...). Some observations: While it is perfectly acceptable for Sasfooty and others to relate their experiences here, it is also acceptable for their claims to be questioned. It's the nature of the forum, and all participants should be aware of this and be able to handle the questions without taking offense. I know that's hard, because when your claims are questioned a normal reaction is to feel as if you are being called a liar. But that's not the case on these forums, it's simply that some members are driven by proof and evidence while others are not. Even when the "normal" reaction is to take offense to questioning, the poster of a claim needs to understand that it is perfectly acceptable for others to pose these questions. This is not a normal social situation we are engaged in, and some leeway has to be given if any of these discussions are to be beneficial in any way to any person. Sasfooty (and others) have obviously had experiences that they can either not explain, or are convinced are BF related. Again, there is nothing wrong with this. After all, this is a Bigfoot forum. But here's my biggest problem with this thread: Saskeptic (IMO) is this forum's best example of civil skepticism. The points he is raising are all very logical and need consideration. Again, IMO, if all skeptics conducted themselves in the same manner as Saskeptic, this forum would be a much nicer place to be. Even though I am "proponent friendly", I still think skeptically unless/until I feel I have good reason to feel otherwise. I think that's part of what is meant by "critical thinking". I am in no way denying or scoffing at the experiences of others, and feel that if this creature exists, I have almost certainly had a few experiences with it. But I don't claim to "know", at least not yet. I'm not saying that others can't know, either. If I saw one, I might very well come back here and tell everyone that I finally do know. But I'm not quite there yet. And it bothers me that Saskeptic is getting pulled through the ringer in this thread. He is not required to believe anything, and he has outlined (with details) why he feels the way he does, just as Sasfooty has done the same. IMO, Saskeptic does not deserve some of the remarks made towards/about him in this thread. He seems to be doing what he does best, which is (again, IMO) approaching things from a perspective of logic, reason and science. That doesn't make him right and someone else wrong, not at all. It just means he is using the tools available to him and in keeping with his training to come to the conclusions that he has. He should not be derided for his views, and neither should Sasfooty for sharing hers. Saskeptic is a bright, shining example of good critical thinking and stellar behavior on this forum. He obviously does not believe in the existence of Bigfoot, but is still fascinated by the possibility. He is always civil and lays out his explanations about why he feels the way he does. Since the forum welcomes skeptics, his views are just as valid as any other. Even if we don't agree with him. I guess what I'm saying is, please cut the guy some slack. If it were up to me, I'd clone him and replace a bunch of other abrasive personalities on this forum. Yes, he's a skeptic. But he's the best one we've got, and I don't think he deserves harsh treatment any more than I think any proponent does (and I don't). This is still "a Bigfoot forum", and these discussions are what it's all about. And his views should in no way hinder anyone from making further claims, either. I want to hear them, and I'm sure many others do as well. But please don't be angered if he or someone else has questions...it's the nature of the forum. If we can disagree civilly, then these talks are productive. Let's not let things degrade into an "us vs. them" mentality. And for cripe's sake, give Sas a break. He's a skeptic, and he can't help it!