Terry Posted March 31, 2012 Share Posted March 31, 2012 Will there ever be a means of convincing those of us who hope there is such thing as bf that it doesn't exist? My guess is technology will do it if that's the case. t. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest ajciani Posted March 31, 2012 Share Posted March 31, 2012 To prove that bigfoots do not exist is a tall order, because it will require the impeachment of all the existing evidence which supports their existence. Using materials commonly available in the 1970s, a foot stomping jig will need to be constructed and field demonstrated, which has the ability to create dynamic footprints of the proper size, pressure, spacing and placement as what has been seen and cast in the wild. (this has not been done) An animal hair expert will need to review the work of others to provide a second opinion as to whether certain hair samples can only be explained by a bigfoot. (some of this was done, but the expert still found some unexplainable hairs). A study will need to be undertaken in which observers see mundane animals (e.g. deer, bear) in situations similar to observations of bigfoots, so as to demonstrate that misidentification is a valid explanation. The Patterson film and other bigfoot films will need to be forgotten. Just a start. I'm sure other tasks can be added on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gigantor Posted March 31, 2012 Admin Share Posted March 31, 2012 Will there ever be a means of convincing those of us who hope there is such thing as bf that it doesn't exist? Welcome to the BFF Terry. I just would like to point out that generally, as a matter of logic, nobody can prove a negative. The burden of proof is on the proponent. So if you think BF exists, by all means, please show us the proof! Having said that, you should know that most everyone here, including skeptics like me, hope that BF exists! That's why we are here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Twilight Fan Posted March 31, 2012 Share Posted March 31, 2012 Well, so far nobody has proven that it exists, so that's as close to proving something doesn't exist. But we may never know for sure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Strick Posted March 31, 2012 Share Posted March 31, 2012 There is no way that technology can prove that Bigfoot doesn't exist. I know this for sure because I have a 6 year old nephew who is a whizz at using the Ipad - however this has done absolutely nothing to dent his faith in the existence of the tooth fairy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted March 31, 2012 Share Posted March 31, 2012 It is virtually impossible to *prove* a negative like gigantor says. So no, I do not see any way that BF can ever be definitively proven *not* to exist. Witness reports continue by credible sources and there is no way that I think/believe/accept that *all* of these continuing reports are mass hallucinations, paraeidolia, mis-identifications, hoaxes..... In fact, I find suggestions of such mass hysteria as laughable. For me, there is just too much there for there not to be something there. I'm not as skeptical as gigantor. Guess I just have too much faith in people and see no advantage for reporting seeing a BF when in fact you didn't in a lot of cases. Heck, doing so only invites ridicule for some and who, in their right mind would seek such? But you'll never see me ridiculing anybody who reports a sighting and it really ticks me off when I see such from others. Truth is that we were not there and do not know. Cool to ask questions so long as they are respectful. Takes some courage to come forth with a sighting of an undocumented species. Not saying I believe everything either. In fact, I think that most sightings are mis-identifications. But not all. Grainy pics and films posted as *proof* drive me absolutely batty. I think they do more harm than good if I'm honest. I was deer hunting and sitting over a swamp one cold and foggy morning. Almost convinced myself that I saw an BF crouched down and thought I saw movement. Wound up being only a stump with some waist-high weeds in front of it moving in the breeze. So I can see firsthand just how easy and innocent an mis-identification could be. I've had the sincere pleasure of some of our members feeling comfortable enough to share their experiences, films, pics and info regarding their sightings with me personally when they did not feel comfortable sharing them with the entire board. I'll never violate their trust by sharing them with others. But again, the answer is no. BF will never be proven to *not* exist. The PGF could be proven an hoax tomorrow and the mystery would still continue because most folks *faith* isn't based on the PGF, and the sightings from credible people continue. I consider myself, rightly or wrongly, an fairly discerning person. I'm smart enough to realize that there are those who would/have *hoaxed* and those who may make an *innocent* mis-identification. But they do not account for *all* of the witness reports. I'm personally frustrated that BF has yet to be proven *to* exist and the species documented to an scientific certainty. But I still have high hopes it will. Too many good and honest people are seeing something. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Holliday Posted March 31, 2012 Share Posted March 31, 2012 (edited) Well said HRP.+ 1 on that. Aside from the glaring obvious hoaxes , the BS reports like " I was abducted by BF & Elvis " type crap & a % of probable mis-IDs,too many honest folks with nothing to gain & no BF agenda still risk their reputations by coming forward. Hard to prove a negative,& easy to say " no such thing" makes a tough row to hoe for the proponent. It really blows,imo, when someone searching for answers about what they've experienced gets shot down in laughter. Doesn't leave me with a high opinion of the ones taking the pot shots either. Ive said before, if you werent there you don't know what they may have seen. Yeah, a lot of what's presented as evidence is weak,& this field has its share of loonies, but,there remain the honest few accounts that probably merit looking into. I doubt you could unconvince those that already "know".the rest of the world will keep guessing I suppose. Edited March 31, 2012 by slicktrick Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JDL Posted March 31, 2012 Share Posted March 31, 2012 As said above, it is impossible to prove a negative. But we, as a community, can establish a mutually acceptable standard that, if met, we all can agree proves bigfoot does not exist. To this end I propose the following: If at least three bigfoot are willing to sign affidavits stating that they do not exist, then we should mutually agree that bigfoot do not exist. I don't think that this will be hard to do, because it appears that a consensus that they do not exist benefits the bigfoot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
salubrious Posted March 31, 2012 Moderator Share Posted March 31, 2012 (edited) sooner or later you would have to line up all the people that claim to have had an encounter and do a mass burial.... By this I mean there are too many people like myself who have had encounters and know that Bigfoot is real. So all those people would have to be silenced if one was to 'prove' that bigfoot doesn't exist. Edited April 1, 2012 by MikeG Clarification by poster added Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Lone Squatcher Posted March 31, 2012 Share Posted March 31, 2012 No one will ever be able to prove they do not exist simply because they do exist. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JDL Posted March 31, 2012 Share Posted March 31, 2012 Well, I know that. And you know that. But I thought I'd play along with things. Besides, no one would be truly convinced unless we had affidavits from at least a hundred bigfoot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Bipedal Ape Posted March 31, 2012 Share Posted March 31, 2012 If people searched for these creatures for 50 years and found nothing . If we lived in a technologically advanced era where people have devices which can shoot photos / record video but we have no photo/video. If we lived in an era of automobiles and we had no dead bigfoot roadkills. If we lived in an era of surveillance camera overkill but have not captured one on camera. If trail camera technology existed and were deployed throughout America but nothing was captured. That would all be pretty convincing that it did not exist. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bipedalist Posted March 31, 2012 BFF Patron Share Posted March 31, 2012 ......If at least three bigfoot are willing to sign affidavits stating that they do not exist, then we should mutually agree that bigfoot do not exist. I like the BF affidavit idea but I think there will have to be some allowances for those that must make their "mark". In such a case it will take some legal definition if the "X" will suffice or not. In the case pictured, there was a little extra graffiti along with the "X" such that I feel quite confident that this signature would pass muster..... now corralling all of these BF's to get the little (or big formation) "X's" out in the woods could be quite a chore but I think we have several members that seem to be quite good at such a task ..... so I say go get 'em..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Holliday Posted March 31, 2012 Share Posted March 31, 2012 (edited) its also possible some of the people videoing ,trail camming & searching have something & choose not to share publicly . not a popular approach,but a possibility . from some discussions ive heard, theres a chance folks out there have weighed the risk vs reward . between the would be squatch killers & the loonie fringe that would haunt a potential hot spot perhaps some choose privacy & safety of themselves & BF over the possible $ a discovery might bring. probably a safe bet not everyone has the same experiences, theories or goals for proving it to the world. Edited March 31, 2012 by slicktrick Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest JiggyPotamus Posted April 1, 2012 Share Posted April 1, 2012 Short of cutting down all the forests across the US I do not see how sasquatch can ever be disproven. It's difficult to prove a negative, non-existence, more-so than existence. The thing is that you are not gathering evidence to prove a claim, but rather disproving evidence as being caused by something other than a sasquatch. I do not see how all current evidence could ever be disputed. Things such as the sheer number of prints, unidentified or unknown hair samples, which are very important imo, as well as eyewitness encounters, etc...There is just too much evidence present on the subject that points to sasquatch existing. And even cutting down all the forests in the US may not do the trick, since the sasquatch could all move to Canada, lol. I have a feeling that we are not going to have to wait too much longer for either more great visual evidence, or proof itself, of the existence of this animal. Maybe the Ketchum report will accomplish this task, but if not, the numbers of enthusiasts and amateur researchers seem to be increasing, and there just may be more people looking. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts