Guest Posted December 17, 2010 Posted December 17, 2010 Ok , everyone lost me at post #174, where I dissolved into chuckles. And to think I was actually debating this .....but 1.) I still think unless bigfoot gets hit full on by a mac truck, there will be no bigfoot roadkill found because of the physics involved, possible pain tolerance issues with bigfoot ( but who knows how they are neurologically wired), and bigfoot's adrenaline spurring him on in a blind panic to run on broken legs wondering what in the hell just hit him. 2.)There isn't roadkill for every known large mammal documented anywhere, doesn't mean it hasn't happened, but this could also be true in bigfoot's case. Only I'm not sure how you would haul a 7-9 foot tall creature weighing close to a 1000 lbs off the road without someone seeing you do it. As usaual, bigfoot probably fled the scene 3.) If I hit a bigfoot,I would stop to gather my senses. I would roll down the window to see if I heard anything. If it sounded threatening, I would head on down the road, assuming I could, and call the police to let them know I hit something, wasn't sure what it was, and where to contact me if needed. If it sounded like it was in pain and not a known animal, I would call 911 for police and emergency assistance and at least try to look for it on the side of the road to see if I could help he/she/or it. If I didn't see anything, I would get back in my car with the doors locked and wait for help. That seems reasonable thing to do, I'm not going up into the brush looking for a large hairy anything day or night that might be dying or in considerable pain. Now all of this sounds rational for a BIG "what if" scenario. Call it a straw man, a plead, or whatever debating term you want to stick on it, it just sounds like common sense to me. What about this isn't rational to explain why we have no bigfoot bodies due to car accidents? After you answer my question can we move on to something else? We have beat this subject into the ground.
gigantor Posted December 17, 2010 Admin Posted December 17, 2010 Name a species of large mammal in the U.S. and southern Canada that has not been recorded as a roadkill, Bigfoot?
Guest Posted December 17, 2010 Posted December 17, 2010 The part of that horse you're flogging concerns me.
xspider1 Posted December 17, 2010 Posted December 17, 2010 Please point out where anyone in this thread wrote that "every single 'known' animal" other than bigfoot has been struck and killed by a car. Be careful what you ask for: ...then they are essentially immune to becoming roadkill, quite unlike all our other wildlife. (bolding mine)Sorry, I think you're a really smart guy, it's just that I was paying attention and I couldn't pass that one up.
Guest Posted December 17, 2010 Posted December 17, 2010 Not one of which has resulted in the recovery of a bigfoot body, ergo, no proof that any of those stories represents an accurate record of the events included. No proof that they did NOT happen, unless you happen to have some? If you'd bothered to read the reports, in at least one case a body WAS recovered and removed by authorities, in others, hairs and other biological samples were recovered. Only because you're overlooking the "when hit by a car" part. Do you know of any North American mammals that don't die when hit by a car? I don't, or at least I have no evidence of any. I've been hit by a car (actually I hit it, but that's splitting hairs) and lived. I'm not sure where you're getting confused between stories of people hitting bigfoots and actual proof of such events. I learned many years ago that there were stories of people clipping bigfoots with their cars. I'm sure Ray was aware of such stories too. If you have proof the reports are false, please post it.
Guest Posted December 17, 2010 Posted December 17, 2010 First time poster here. I use to be a believer. As I have grown older my skepticism has increased to the point where now I am a 99% skeptic. A few points I would like to make. First, the burden of proof is on the believers. Skeptics do not have to prove anything. Skeptics don't have to prove you did not see a bigfoot when camping. Skeptics do not have to prove what you hit with your car was not a bigfoot. So please don't ask me to prove anything. As to the roadkill argument: Believers act as though all bigfoot are 7 foot tall and weigh 800 pounds and can only be killed by a full on semi-truck collision. Don't bigfoot have kids? Are those kids born 7 foot tall, weighing 800 pounds? Why do the kids not get hit by cars? Great parenting I guess. Here's the biggie for me. Why the lack of good trail cam pics? I'm not talking about some screwed up picture where your not sure what your looking at. I'm not talking about some picture with a black mass 40 yards away that can not be identified. I'm talking about a pic that has only two options, bigfoot or hoax. If your answer is "He smells them" then I guess he always gets lucky and is downwind from them. The "smell" argument is not good enough for me. If he is smart enough, lucky enough, whatever, to always avoid a trail cam then why does he have a problem avoiding cars? If the best you can do for an argument is "Its bigfoot and not just some animal" then you will never convince me.
Guest Posted December 17, 2010 Posted December 17, 2010 Always nice to see someone start of on a good note, welcome to the forum Alduflux. I don't think any of us are trying to prove anything, believer or skeptic. What I get out of all this is who's rational makes the most sense. I see flaws on both sides of the argument. You can't tell me they don't exist and I can't convince you that they do exist. However, if someone asks for an explanation for why there is no __________, based on what I do know, I offer an explanation that fits with my knowledge base. You will never find proof of anything on a forum and no one owes you or any other skeptic proof. If you want possible insight into a whole lot of "maybes", even if you know the creature exists, then it's not a bad place to come. I'm not sure what a skeptic that is 99% sure that bigfoot doesn't exist would enjoy reading on a bigfoot forum, would you like to elaborate on that?
Sasfooty Posted December 17, 2010 Posted December 17, 2010 A few points I would like to make. First, the burden of proof is on the believers. Skeptics do not have to prove anything. We (belivers/knowers) come here to try to discuss a subject, & "skeptics" jump in with their endless demands for proof until almost any meaningful discussion is virtually impossible. It's already been proven to many of us, yet here the skeptics are, telling us our eyes are lying, (if not our mouths). Believers don't have to prove anything, either. What obligation do we have to convince anybody of anything? Who gives a rat's behind whether you or anybody else believes or not? What possible benefit would we get from your belief? I don't feel a burden to prove anything. Enjoy your skepticism.
Guest Posted December 17, 2010 Posted December 17, 2010 I check in every now and then to see if that elusive trail cam pic that makes me change my mind shows up. So far it hasn't. Curiousity brings me here.
Guest Posted December 17, 2010 Posted December 17, 2010 We (belivers/knowers) come here to try to discuss a subject, & "skeptics" jump in with their endless demands for proof until almost any meaningful discussion is virtually impossible. It's already been proven to many of us, yet here the skeptics are, telling us our eyes are lying, (if not our mouths). Believers don't have to prove anything, either. What obligation do we have to convince anybody of anything? Who gives a rat's behind whether you or anybody else believes or not? What possible benefit would we get from your belief? I don't feel a burden to prove anything. Enjoy your skepticism. This thread is titled "Debunk the Debunking" so someone disagrees with you.
Sasfooty Posted December 17, 2010 Posted December 17, 2010 I check in every now and then to see if that elusive trail cam pic that makes me change my mind shows up. So far it hasn't. Curiousity brings me here. So how many trail cams do you have out?
Sasfooty Posted December 17, 2010 Posted December 17, 2010 Well, then you must have lots of good pictures to show us. Otherwise, you probably wouldn't feel qualified to be here criticizing our efforts.
Guest Posted December 17, 2010 Posted December 17, 2010 Welcome to the BFF, alduflux. I didn't see anything in alduflux's first post that was criticizing anyone. I fully understand why someone that is skeptical would peruse the BFF. Proponents can be pretty skeptical, too. Alduflux makes a great observation concerning game cameras and moving vehicles with respect to bigfoot. Well, then you must have lots of good pictures to show us. Sasfooty, I wouldn't think that you, of all people, would want to open that can of worms.
Drew Posted December 17, 2010 Posted December 17, 2010 Sasfooty, I wouldn't think that you, of all people, would want to open that can of worms. Money.
Recommended Posts