Leaderboard

http://calgaryherald.com/entertainment/local-arts/lee-berger-to-share-fascination-with-hominids-at-national-geographic-live-presentation https://phys.org/news/2016-04-hobbit-older-science-wiser.html Two new events to do some deep thinking about! Take away, I have teams in the field everyday of the week!

That frequent contact ended over three years ago now when the last of their habitat was clear cut and that group of BF left. I cannot gather evidence from BF that are not present. Funny how that works. If I fabricated anything the evidence and encounters would still be happening. They are not. I have posted several footprint pictures and infra sound graphics over the years and have been told by the enlightened and all knowing skeptics that they must have been hoaxed because since BF does not exist, they cannot leave footprints or make sounds. I have not been able to get a BF to surrender it's body for the lab table or give me tissue or blood samples. They seem to have other ideas. And as far as anecdotal information, it makes no difference to you that the government of the United States used to trust me to command an aircraft loaded with hydrogen bombs. People with that level of security clearance are not delusional and you can normally believe what they say. But that is not evidence. You know full well if I had proof that would hold up to science, I would have presented a paper that you probably would not believe either. But at least I do field work looking for that proof. Do you?

Interesting exchange in this thread. I don't remember reading it back when it was originated. My personal opinion on who is more believable has nothing to do with education. I think anyone who isn't living under a rock has got to know something about wildlife and can tell a bear from an upright bipedal Sasquatch when the sighting is in daylight with an unobstructed view. Especially when the description doesn't fit a known animal. I also don't think that someone who wants to remain anonymous should not be believed. I am more apt to believe sightings that come from anonymous people simply because I don't think they are trying to seek attention. What I have noticed about skeptics is that they are skeptical about everything. Those that I know don't believe in anything they haven't seen or experienced for themselves. No matter how much evidence you put in front of them, they have their own explanation or reasons to deny it. Each one of us thinks and processes information in our own way. To some everything is either black or white and others have an open mind and the ability to consider that there are still unknowns in this world.

I'd take Joe Sixpack over the city boy any day, and if Joe Sixpack hunts regularly, I'd give him the same credibility as the biologist. No one is prepared for a first encounter, and people who live on the land generally have better knowledge of it than someone who does not, no matter what their education level. It is a bias to consider rural people to be less intelligent or reliable than any other group of people.