Jump to content

Leaderboard

Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation on 06/15/2012 in all areas

  1. Lindsay doesn't know my name, and I don't mind that at all. LOL I think an educated guess would be that some species are very closely related and the controversy occurs between the lumpers and the splitters.
    2 points
  2. Saskeptic, I'd like to direct your attention to the bolded part of your posts. There seems to be a contradiction. Why give careful consideration to evidence that "in your own view" will not prove bigfoot exists? Reality is binary, and since it is not possible to prove a negative, the only resolution is to prove it does , with or without any hypothesis and with the very science you say wouldn't get us any closer. Why consider any evidence if you don't believe BF can be proven? Why would Dr. Bryan Sykes be willing to do a study, if there was no possible outcome of proof in the design of his study using hair analysis? Does faith in science play a part here?
    1 point
  3. Possible reasons: 1) Do not want to scare the public 2) Do not want to make zillions of acres of wilderness off limits to people 3) Do not want zillions of idiots in the woods looking for BF with guns 4) Do not want to reveal possible security gaps in military bases 5) Something else.... I am personally on the fence about a government cover-up, but if the stories are true that Park Rangers are told not to talk of it, then there might be some fire behind that smoke...
    1 point
  4. I trust any material from Robert Lindsay about as much as I trust anything from Tom Biscardi.
    1 point
This leaderboard is set to New York/GMT-05:00
×
×
  • Create New...