What Is The Statistical Probability That All Sightings Are False?

[Guest]

^Not biting Ray. UFOs have nothing to do with the validity of BF.

[Guest RayG]

Yes, and bigfoot have nothing to do with the validity of UFOs.

However, I wasn't attempting to validate either one. I was pointing out similarities, which you apparently took to be some form of ridicule. As I suspected, you have no reasoning for why the comparisons fail, only excuses for why you don't like the list.

RayG

[ShadowBorn]

Bigfootdom has no definitive proof of large, hairy, undiscovered creatures inhabiting the forests of North America -- UFOlogy has no definitive proof of aliens or the spaceships they supposedly use to visit our planet.

There are probably others, but that's a start.

RayG

RayG

You can not put the two together,these creatures exist to all of us wittnesses.People who have seen these creatures who have found proof of thier sightings.How can a creature that is huge and heavy not be able to leave some sign behind all these sightings.Do researchers even look?Even if the sighting has taken place weeks or months there will still be sign of thier travel.True that some reports can be false but then again why would a wittness even want to report a creature that everyone says does not exist.It is not the kinda of thing that one wants to talk about, but being able to talk about does help.

I am in total dissagreement with this whole UFO thing and some what knowing these creatures I have always been with the idea that maybe they just happen to be in the exact same place and time of a UFO sighting.Mostly that it is in thier nature to be curious.My Theory that i am sure can be backed up by reports by Mufon and BFRO by selected dates and times.

[Guest]

Julio126

I don't mean to interrupt someone else's argument, but your statement applies both ways, i'm sure people who have encountered UFO's believe they exist also. This is not the forum to discuss that unless it is directly in relation with BF.

[indiefoot]

Of course there are precedents where the sincerely held beliefs of millions of people are simply believed to be wrong by another group of people.

A good example would be the central truth claim of the revealed religions. Although in philosophical terms the Judeo-Christian religions are very similar to one another, the central revelations at the heart of each faith make them very different in practice. These central truths are simply held to be erroneous by an adherent of an alternative faith. The millions of people that believe that an opposing religion's truth claim is false far dwarfs the number of people that claim to have had a Bigfoot sighting.

It is possible that all the sightings could be wrong.

I think your analogy would better describe the people vs. ape debate, since all of the participants in your analogy accept the framework but differ on details.

Edited March 5, 2012 by indiefoot

[Guest RayG]

julio126, I've not seen a bigfoot, but I have seen a UFO. I do not put them together like there is some sort of connection between the two, like bigfoot piloting UFOs, for example. I put them together because they are both unexplained mysteries with a lot of similarities in how they are treated, pursued, and reported. The bigfoot mystery is one I've been following for over 40 years.

I guess what I'm trying to compare is the 'phenomenon' of bigfoot as compared to the 'phenomenon' of UFOs, and how both phenomena have similarities.

If people choose not to see them, so be it, but it won't make them false comparisons.

RayG

[Guest FuriousGeorge]

The list has some good comparisons. The maps do too. I see what is implied with the sightings of both and there might be something to it, but there might not be. It's not definitive.

If an airline pilot reports a sighting of a UFO in an airspace that is not supposed to be there, it gets investigated by the feds. The reason for the investigation is mostly not a curiosity of an alien aircraft. It's for reasons of a potential threat to national security. This is an investigation that occurs despite of the lack of proof of alien aircraft. I'm cool with that because at least they are investigating. I'm sure their first and only approach would be to see what manmade object was in the airspace. I'm guessing they do not investigate alien aircraft, but do respond to the sighting. I find it ironic that they rule out completely an alien aircraft and yet they were willing to fund SETI. We've even had presidents talking publicly about the potential. I'm sure the feds roll their eyeballs. <--- mostly opinions, I have nothing to back it up.

The potential of having a bigfoot is not a threat to national security and will not receive the same respect of entertaining the slightest minuscule of thought from the feds.

The sightings of both are dissimilar comparisons from a follow up investigating standpoint. Due to one having the lack of potential to be a threat to national security. One is investigated by the feds based on sightings alone, and one is not. We need to load up bigfoot with photon torpedos in order to get any respect.

[ShadowBorn]

julio126, I've not seen a bigfoot, but I have seen a UFO. I do not put them together like there is some sort of connection between the two, like bigfoot piloting UFOs, for example. I put them together because they are both unexplained mysteries with a lot of similarities in how they are treated, pursued, and reported. The bigfoot mystery is one I've been following for over 40 years.

I guess what I'm trying to compare is the 'phenomenon' of bigfoot as compared to the 'phenomenon' of UFOs, and how both phenomena have similarities.

If people choose not to see them, so be it, but it won't make them false comparisons.

RayG

RayG

Now that makes a big difference ,I have never seen a UFO but have a Bigfoot\Sasquatch.I can see the similaraties too,so it would take alot Judgments calls on all reports.Not all reports are the same which makes one think that it could be false.But why report some thing false or make statements that are false on reports.Why do most people do not want to share thier real names if what they saw was false.

I mean I am just not going to wake up one morning and say to the world "hey i saw a UFO\Bigfoot" in the morning.People world wide just do not do this Do they?My first sighting i was excited to share but was met with redicule just as you have with your encounter.I am sure that people are not looking for the redicule but get it because they are trying to explain some thing that has never been explained to them in the first place.Same goes with ufo as it does with bigfoot.I am sure that there false reports by people who hoax but these people you will find that thier motive is found early in there reports.Same goes with ufo's as it does with bigfoots.Now i lost where i was going with this but i believe that sightings from most people are honest sightings and that thier testamony of a creature living within our forest can only be true.Whether we are alone in this universe well that remains and whether there is a living being living off our land well we all know how that thread is going.If you believe i seen a living entity within our forest I will believe you seen what you saw.

Mark

[Guest Kerchak]

By attempting to draw a connection between BF and UFOs, you are attempting to link the concept of BF, which is very simple and straightforward with a concept (UFOs) that is much more "fantastic" and the subject of ridicule, being considered absurd by many.

It's not only ridiculing, but it's also ad hom. To wit: "Those BF 'believers'...just like those UFO kooks!"

Just a point but aren't UFOs/aliens the subject of more interest, ponderings and outright belief around the world than hairy bipedal man-apes?

I would have thought more people are interested in UFOs/Aliens and believe in them than either Bigfoot or the Yeti.

Haven't there been many polls done where the percentages of belief or possibility of UFOs/aliens is actually quite high?

Most people I know are open to the possibility/probablity that there is extraterrestrial life and that they might be visiting us.

[Guest]

What a strange derail for this thread: bigfooters objecting to having their phenomenon lumped in any way with the UFO phenomenon. There has even been a charge (led by a guy who uses a gray alien for an avatar) that the mere comparison of the similarity in geographic distribution of reports from the two phenomena amounts to a logical fallacy in the argument from ridicule, because we're serious about this bigfoot stuff but everybody knows UFOs are a woo-woo fringe topic.

It's quite sad (and frankly, a bit laughable) that RayG's perfectly middle-of-the-road "these things are similar" post has been met with such opposition. His statements in that post are dispassionate, and demonstrably true. In addition to the unreasonable response to Ray's post, there's a "no true Scotsman" fallacy at work here too: bigfoot has often been reported in concert with UFOs, orbs, and other stuff. There very much is a segment of the bigfooter community that associates bigfoots with aliens/interdimensional beings. While Ray did not address that segment in his post, I find it rather disingenuous of those rebutting Ray to ignore that segment.

[slabdog]

What a strange derail for this thread:

Well put Sas....

I was thinking the same thing.

Everybody use care to make sure that this thread stays on topic.

Statistical correlations and conclusions drawn between UFO sightings and BF sightings? (specifically when it comes to probability of ratio of mistaken sightings) - Probably OK. (So long as it compliments the main topic)

Discussion correlating BF and UFOs? or discussion specifically about UFO sightings? Or discussion disputing that BFs and UFO's are related? - Way off topic (start a new thread in the campfire chat)

I just don't want to see this thread degrade into UFO debate.

I feel we might be near a teetering point.

Edited March 5, 2012 by slabdog

[indiefoot]

It's quite sad (and frankly, a bit laughable) that RayG's perfectly middle-of-the-road "these things are similar" post has been met with such opposition.

Maybe because it's The Bigfoot Forums, still the web's most popular one-stop-shop for Sasquatch talk. I'm waiting to see if there is a UFO connection to the topic of this thread.

[Guest]

The only "connections" to be made in the context of the thread relate to interpretations of the data attributed to bigfoots and to flying saucers: they are similar.

Despite the fact that many people have claimed a direct bigfoot/UFO experience, neither Kitakaze, RayG, or myself having been pushing that connection in this thread. We're only pointing out that if one uses the logic that "lots of anecdotal bigfoot accounts" means that "bigfoot must be real", then the same should be true for other phenomena for which reporting is similar.

[indiefoot]

If you substitute "must be real" with "should be vigorously investigated" I will concede the point.

[Guest]

Agreed. Very well said indiefoot.

Edited March 5, 2012 by Caesar