Questions For The Knowers

[Guest]

The rules one agrees to before ever posting on BFF seem clear to me. Among those rules:

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. On the BFF we accept very little at face value. We may have a tendency to over-analyze claims and be more skeptical than some other forums dedicated to this topic, but we think that is preferable to the alternative.

It's one thing to be skeptical, and it's another to fall into the "extraordinary claims" verbal trap set by the Skeptics.

A claim is a claim is a claim. Scientific impartiality requires all claims to be equally vetted without favor or prejudice. On that basis alone the "extraordinary claims" mantra fails to meet a scientific standard.

Furthermore, it's subjective in addition to being biased. What is an "extraordinary claim"? What is "extraordinary evidence"?

Lastly it isn't a transparent process. Who gets to determine what constitutes "extraordinary" in the first place? How are those decision makers vetted for competence and objectivity? To whom are those decision makers accountable?

I'm sure a number of our Skeptical brethren will put in an appearance and accuse me of wanting the bar "lowered" in the case of BF below that accepted for other species. That is not the case. All I want is the same bar for BF as that for other species.

That means accepting what professional scientists such as Dr Meldrum, whose credentials and conclusions would not be questioned if he were speaking about a chimpanzee, have to say about evidence they obtain and analyze concerning bf, barring superior evidence that they are in error. That means accepting that a normal bell-curve track size distribution, which in any other species would be considered perfectly valid evidence of a fox population or a bear population is equally valid evidence for the existence of a bf population.

one bar for all.

That's true science.

[salubrious]

Back in high school (a long time ago) NASA sent a box of moon rocks around the country to various high schools. So I got to see them close up and personal.

So I saw some moon rocks. According to me. That's my testimony, based on my experience and the claims of those that controlled the rocks themselves. However, I never saw the proof that these rocks were from the moon- I just had to take the claims of the people that had them. The fancy glass boxes and the guard helped with the believability. I used that word for a reason- I did not see them take those rocks from the moon.

So a skeptic could make an argument that I saw nothing of the sort and make a good case for it. So, I believe that I saw rocks from the moon, and I know I encountered a bigfoot. Both statements are accurate with the understanding of what the difference is between belief and knowledge.

In both cases though I have zero proof. Funny thing, are there are more people that saw bigfoot than those that saw moon rocks?

[bipedalist]

...On that basis alone the "extraordinary claims" mantra fails to meet a scientific standard.

Yah, but Carl Sagan made a quote of it in a book of his and one of his quotes is in my signature line, so I really think there might be something to it.....

@salubrious bro. above, I'm just waiting for that Sasquatch in the "glass" box that bobali is promising us, if it goes on display/tour "live like memorex" so much the better.... as long as it's studied and released of course....

Edited May 1, 2012 by bipedalist

[salubrious]

I might have a different viewpoint than most about BF, but I am convinced they are quite intelligent- certainly the behavior I witnessed was something quite deliberate, although *why* or *what* they were up to is another matter.

Anyway, I would be a little nervous about doing anything that might be considered harm to one (catch and release, body for science, all that). Even though they are out there, and I'm thinking there are a lot more of them than anyone realized, for the most part they seem to leave us alone. I'd hate to think what it would be like if they decided that enough was enough.

[Guest]

I began to think they were real after reading a bucket of bfro reports a year + ago, over Christmas vacation--about 80% sure, I guess. Four months later, in April, over a year ago, I saw one standing by a road. It did seem pretty coincidental, but I didn't imagine it. A few others saw it at the same time, I hear, although I only talked to one other witness, myself.

My daughter saw one last summer--or part of one-- in another place. I was with her but didn't see it because I was driving.

Edited May 1, 2012 by Kings Canyon

[JDL]

It's one thing to be skeptical, and it's another to fall into the "extraordinary claims" verbal trap set by the Skeptics.

A claim is a claim is a claim. Scientific impartiality requires all claims to be equally vetted without favor or prejudice. On that basis alone the "extraordinary claims" mantra fails to meet a scientific standard.

Furthermore, it's subjective in addition to being biased. What is an "extraordinary claim"? What is "extraordinary evidence"?

Lastly it isn't a transparent process. Who gets to determine what constitutes "extraordinary" in the first place? How are those decision makers vetted for competence and objectivity? To whom are those decision makers accountable?

I'm sure a number of our Skeptical brethren will put in an appearance and accuse me of wanting the bar "lowered" in the case of BF below that accepted for other species. That is not the case. All I want is the same bar for BF as that for other species.

That means accepting what professional scientists such as Dr Meldrum, whose credentials and conclusions would not be questioned if he were speaking about a chimpanzee, have to say about evidence they obtain and analyze concerning bf, barring superior evidence that they are in error. That means accepting that a normal bell-curve track size distribution, which in any other species would be considered perfectly valid evidence of a fox population or a bear population is equally valid evidence for the existence of a bf population.

one bar for all.

That's true science.

I have to agree with this. The "extraordinary claim" argument boils down to "If you try to tell us something we don't believe, we get to impose extra conditions on your 'supposed' evidence". This attitude results in the dismissal of evidence that may otherwise justify additional research given a less controversial topic. How often have we seen physical evidence that indicates the presence of an unidentified species ruled "inconclusive". Hairs that exist, but do not conform to any known species, for example. They came from something, but relate them to bigfoot and they are dismissed. If they indicated a new species of bear, such as a brown/polar hybrid, people would be more receptive and go looking for some.

[indiefoot]

I firmly believe I've seen a Bigfoot on two occasions. I am convinced for myself they are out there, yet not certain what they are. I'm here trying to answer some of the remaining questions I have. I share some of the things I stumble across with the group.

BTW, I believe Sagan stole the quote from Marcello Truzzi

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marcello_Truzzi

Edited May 2, 2012 by indiefoot

[bipedalist]

Yep, it wasn't Sagan's most original moment for sure, but don't recall if he ever claimed credit for it..... I don't think he did but could be proven wrong.

[indiefoot]

Sagan made it stick and skeptics have been chanting it ever since.

[Guest WesT]

I'm of the opinion there are 2 types of knowers. The ones that don't have a choice and put 99-100% of their eggs in one basket. And then the polar opposites that have a choice and choose to put 99-100% of all their eggs in one basket and then somehow claim to be a skeptic. And when the 2 meet it isn't a pretty sight.

I don't know for a fact that what I saw dead was a hairy wildman of some sorts. It's illegal to stop on an overpass on interstate, and I didn't want to become involved with a potential murder investigation. So I never stopped and got an up close look. I just kept telling myself it was a person with a genetic defect and not to get involved. So I'll never really know for a fact what it was. But upon reflection I would deem it highly suspect of being a hairy wildman, but very well could have been something else.

[CMBigfoot]

@WTB1

You ask why knowers come here. Is this not a Bigfoot Forum. I am a knower and I come here because I see some of the believers & newbies have a lot of questions and I would like to help them if I can from my own personal experiences. I'm not here to convert people to my side. Just share some info that hopefully will help he/she out in their research. I'm glad I came to this forum, there are a lot of nice and intelligent people here to share info and experiences with or just talk too.

I don't understand why non believers go to a forum that they don't agree with. If I don't believe or agree with something I don't go to that forum and start demanding proof or calling people liars or crazy. If a person has nothing nice to say don't say anything at all. Life is too short for that type of B.S. We need to build eachother up not tear eachother down.

[Guest]

I agree with CMbigfoot.

If you saw it, you are a knower cuz you know they are real. That is not such an exclusive club at all.

Extraordinary claims, blah, blah, yeah yeah. I know. Just because *genuflect* Carl Sagan said it doesn't make it sensible. I accepted that rule when I signed on to post in these forums. Fora, whatever. Okay, fine. I am not going to point it out every time someone flings it in my face because I have to go with that flow around here.

BUT IMO it's just a neat little motto with which to dismiss anything you don't really want to be true. What is extraordinary? Hardly a reasonable or measurable standard. I think it's become what someone else who knows the quote doesn't want to accept as true.

It's become a pat answer to witness testimony and that is nonsense. To refute testimony you have to prove the witness wrong, a liar, or mentally unbalanced. If bigfoot exists is such an extraordinary claim, people wouldn't know wthat that was, there would not be a jillion research orgs, videos, reports, and members here. Testimony IS evidence. Check with your local court of law. And the testimony of thousands qualifies as not just evidence, but certainly as extraordinary evidence, and, maybe, if we can be objective, it qualifies as proof.

[bipedalist]

.....Is this not a Bigfoot Forum

I prefer to see it as a part-time Bigfoot Forum, part-time torture test and half-time study in electronic communication

FAIL depending on whether your glass is half-full or half-empty.

[Guest]

if I were in their shoes I would think that coming to a forum like this would be motivated by a need to connect with other knowers to gain knowledge about my experience and find out more about BF.

And that about sums it up for me. When I had my first two experiences, I was totally clueless about which end was up. I was completely gobsmacked and had no idea where to go for information. A google search brought me here, I read some things that made sense and I've stayed.

It's fine with me that there are knowers, believers and skeptics here - to each his own. I try to live by the "do as you will and harm none" mantra so no skin off my nose if you don't believe the same thing I do.

And, I don't really care if anyone believes me or not.

Edited November 2, 2012 by madison5716

[Guest grandcherokee]

Ah. The first thread I've started on this forum.

For the record and so we're on the same page, I take "knowers" to be people who haven't just had an at- night, questionable sighting or a fleeting glimpse, or even, a decent sighting. I take 'knowers' to mean people who have had excellent, extended sightings where they are 100% in their mind that they were not hoaxed etc...Read I believe JDL's account. Now he's a knower!

So, as has been asked several times in threads to skeptics...why do you come here? No doubt the 'knowers' are smaller in number than simply the believers. I suspect strongly that you've even formed your own clique and probably correspond offline too. You have something very special in common. For you people there is no debate. What is your intent? Is it to, having become a believer from a good sighting you know they exist, convince others too? If so, why? Many of you didn't believe until you had your encounter. So why would you ask others to do so?

Some of you are very angry at times too. Why? You have a leg up on the skeptics and know not only something they don't know, but something the world doesn't know. Why wouldn't you sit back and laugh? Or even, why wouldn't you agree with the skeptics? Yes, agree. Tell them/us, "Yes, all of your points are well taken. I never would have believed it if I hadn't had my sighting either."

Your post is 'par excellence' for this forum.

I for one do not know what is a 'knower' or 'non knower'!

If you are such a knower that you have had repeat encounters, then by now you should have learned to be prepared for such events. Things like photographs, or video. Too much to ask, of a multiple encounter individual? Or should I just take your word for it? After all, we know each other so well!

What you experienced, is just that..nothing more! Tell your story, but do not expect to convince others that you encountered a sasquatch, unless you have proof of such.! Because the simple truth of life is that you should never believe in something just because someone says it is true!

Learn to think for yourself. You should never tell someone that something is true, unless you have personal proof of such and are willing to share it.

Otherwise all you are putting forth is your own opinion on what you encountered. Without proof, or evidence, all you are doing is asking people to believe you..just because you say they should.

Seriously WTB1, you would ask knowers "why do you come here?". Dude, what better place to go than here? It is after all called The Bigfoot Forums. As BFSleuth said we will be closely monitering this thread. If I get the feeling that you have started this thread for the purpose of stirring the pot/trolling, It will be shut down in a flash. The whole thing in your opening post about "forming your own clique and probably correspond offline too" reeks of baiting to me. And for the record Knowers have not been exposed, those who are less than truthful have.

This thread is on a slippery slope, be careful not to ride it off said slope.

I think that it is on a 'right on' slope!

One that has been to long ignored by people who are looking for some 'Messiah' to come down to earth and thell them the secrets of Sasquatch!

I said it over five years ago on this forum ,when Bipto was at the controls.."..Sasuatch will never be discovered here!!

It will be discovered out in the fiel

Bigfootforums and Bigfootdiscussion, are just forums. Merely words. Some quasi- evidence. With never a shred of proof towards the existence of this creature.

Sorry!

But after 6 years of coming here such is the only result.

What you seek will never be found on such websites and forums.

You will encounter nothing but speculation and possible evidence ( word of mouth..because no one is going to send such evidence to you! )but never proof!

For if there was proof..then the mystery would be over and we would be dealing with a listed animal!

Back in high school (a long time ago) NASA sent a box of moon rocks around the country to various high schools. So I got to see them close up and personal.

So I saw some moon rocks. According to me. That's my testimony, based on my experience and the claims of those that controlled the rocks themselves. However, I never saw the proof that these rocks were from the moon- I just had to take the claims of the people that had them. The fancy glass boxes and the guard helped with the believability. I used that word for a reason- I did not see them take those rocks from the moon.

So a skeptic could make an argument that I saw nothing of the sort and make a good case for it. So, I believe that I saw rocks from the moon, and I know I encountered a bigfoot. Both statements are accurate with the understanding of what the difference is between belief and knowledge.

In both cases though I have zero proof. Funny thing, are there are more people that saw bigfoot than those that saw moon rocks?

Funny thing! You have no proof to present that you saw either!!

Not saying that you are lying. But I do not know you, so what you stated in your post is calling for me to believe in your truthfullness merely because you think I should!

Not a convincing argument.

and that is the bottom line for stories which appear in forums.

Learn what seems practical, yes. But also be very selective about what you gleam onto in these places.

The only research which matters to you is your own.

Not Meldrum's..or Noll's...or Dahinden's..or Green's...or Steenburg's...or Miller's....just yours. And you do not have to convince anyone other than yourself that what you experienced was real.

Take it and enjoy it!

But do not try to sway others with it!

It will not work.

And there is no reason that it should!

Your truth is not my truth!

Embrace yours and I will embrace mine!

Cheers!