Bigfoot Research – Still No Evidence, But Plenty Of Excuses To Explain Why There’S No Evidence

[Drew]

You have 10,000 stories from credible people about a Giant Hairy Bipedal Beast that exists in Trailer parks and rest areas of semi-rural North America, those people are certain that Bigfoot left some footprints and drooled on their living room window.

I have 10,000,000 stories from honest children who are certain that Santa Claus brought them a bunch of presents on Christmas Eve. those children are certain that Santa Claus left those presents, and ate those cookies they left out the night before.

Let's try running some DNA samples and see which one is real.

It is an almost perfect parallel. It cannot possibly be discarded as easily as you would like.

[dmaker]

@DWA, "And I should note that anyone who's telling the truth and is made fun of has a right I can't deny to feel insulted. " That's a fair enough statement, except I never said anything that could be considered making fun of Native Americans. So, you were still out of line accusing me of insulting them or making fun of them.

[Guest]

You dissapoint me.

Ditto. You're the one who indicated that you couldn't think of some mythological entity that would show such consistency in reports of its appearance and/or habits as we have for bigfoot. I'm fully aware that bigfoot reports (ostensibly) come from people seriously claiming to have seen such creatures, whereas Santa Claus is obvious mythology to all but young children. My point was not to compare the veracity of "Santa" reports to "bigfoot" reports. The point is that there can be remarkable consistency in the general knowledge of beings that are maintained entirely through folklore. We need no real, live Santa for people all over the country to picture him as a rotund, elderly, bearded gentleman in a red suit, cheerily piloting a sleigh of flying reindeer.

What you've done is throw the predictable hissy-fit of a bigfooter who has not really considered what could be the description of a truly folkloric bigfoot.(Ironically, that's what your plus-buddy DWA accuses me of all the time - i.e., that I haven't really thought about the evidence.)

You're not really prepared for that serious, adult discussion of bigfoot if you can't handle the serious suggestion that there is no bigfoot. In contrast, I'm here every day entertaining the notion that I'm completely wrong, and that I could be proven so in an instant.

[Drew]

No possible way ALL of those kids could be wrong... Even if only one is right.

When you can prove that there is no Santa, come talk to me.

[WSA]

Saskeptic...Yes, I got your intent the first time. Your premise is not a serious one, or at least one I don't think deserves to be addressed seriously. I'm going to do you the credit of believing you don't equate the eyewitness encounter reports with a children's fairy tale and just move on. If that is truly one of your explanations for the phenomenon, you undermine yourself considerably. Then again, if you have castings of sleigh tracks from a rooftop, you've got my undivided attention.

Edited February 8, 2013 by WSA

[Guest Cervelo]

Drew

Edited February 8, 2013 by Cervelo

[Guest DWA]

[Edited to say something better.]

Saskeptic: you don't think about this topic in a serious way. That whole "proven wrong in an instant" means, the day you are, that you have been utterly wrong in every way you have looked at this topic, up and down, from day one. WSA and I will have shown ourselves to be far superior scientists, at least when it comes to this topic, and with no credentials. You aren't engaging your mind on this. Just like when the mainstream fail to, the only guide I need is what you say. "Plus-buddy?" Who's Drew's? That guy isn't thinking about this either.

Drew: game raise long overdue. C'mon man. I can't prove a negative, remember? Sauce for the goose...never mind that...um, what is your evidence for Santa Claus? This should be good. (Every parent lies to his kids about Santa Claus. If you don't know that you aren't a parent. I just explained it.)

dmaker: you're taking something way too seriously. Apologize to every bigfoot eyewitness and I'll rethink that. ;-)

Edited June 30, 2014 by DWA

[Guest]

No. It's what I said:

Estimates vary, I said why; and I said that's why you have that hill of rock salt nearby to take them with.

I don't know if you've noticed this, but sometimes I have great difficulty in deciphering something you've written, to the point at which I suspect it's willful obfuscation.

So . . . if Bindernagel thinks there are several thousand bigfoots, he's just offering an estimate that could vary. If I make a similar statement, it destroys my entire premise?

Saskeptic...Yes, I got your intent the first time. Your premise is not a serious one, or at least one I don't think deserves to be addressed seriously.

It is serious. It's not my problem if you can't deal with the possibility of a purely folkloric bigfoot.

[WSA and I will have shown ourselves to be far superior scientists, at least when it comes to this topic,

Yay - a new high, or low as the case may be . . .

[Guest DWA]

I don't know if you've noticed this, but sometimes I have great difficulty in deciphering something you've written, to the point at which I suspect it's willful obfuscation.

So . . . if Bindernagel thinks there are several thousand bigfoots, he's just offering an estimate that could vary. If I make a similar statement, it destroys my entire premise?

Lost me. This, um, happened sometime this month?

It is serious. It's not my problem if you can't deal with the possibility of a purely folkloric bigfoot.

Uh, no, it's not serious.

Yay - a new high, or low as the case may be . . .

Man, when that "instant" you speak of comes up...

Edited February 9, 2013 by DWA
to soften snarkiness

[dmaker]

No possible way ALL of those kids could be wrong... Even if only one is right.

When you can prove that there is no Santa, come talk to me.

^^ Plussed

I know this has been said before, but what UFOs , aliens and ghosts? More of those than there are BF reports.

[WSA]

Saskeptic, but I do. I presume some degree of copy-catism, and I've read my Joseph Campbell, thankyouverymuch. I enjoy a good romp through the most popular myths on Snopes.com. But the whole myth and allegory avenue can only take you so far. As we know, folktales are very pleasing to tell and pass on, but always, always, always serve some larger purpose. In that sense, the benefit delivered to the teller should be a point of focus. Against that, you have to examine the individual's cost in perpetuating the myth. When you are talking about BF, the individual cost is high: ridicule, loss of credibility, exile to the category of the unreliable. As I've said here before, those tags are not of little consideration to somebody living in a tight knit rural society. You may have never lived in such a community, and if not, you need to take the word of somebody who has. If you think getting a report posted to an obscure website is sufficient motivation for an individual to do this, well....I'd just question what experience you might have in that regard. As for me, in 30 years of practicing trial law and taking testimony from thousands of individuals, living in 6 states, (two marriages) and 20 or so jobs from a bricklayer on up to my present position, I've met this kind of person hardly at all. Let me tell you, I have no illusions about what people are capable of doing, or their motivations for doing it. Am I just deluded? Where do you meet these kinds of people you credit with making and perpetuating this folklore? I'd be really interested to know.

^^ Plussed

I know this has been said before, but what UFOs , aliens and ghosts? More of those than there are BF reports.

I haven't a clue. Go ask somebody on an Alien or Ghost message board, I'd say! I have not active interest in those kinds of phenomenon, so I have no base of knowledge from which to speak intelligently about them.

Edited February 8, 2013 by WSA

[Guest DWA]

^^ Plussed

I know this has been said before, but what UFOs , aliens and ghosts? More of those than there are BF reports.

[Losing count of the number of times he has posted this, here alone]

UFOs are what the abbreviation says they are. What uniformity can there be in that? I've never heard of any two alike.

Ghosts are the psychological experiences of the people who see them. Done.

[dmaker]

"Ghosts are the psychological experiences of the people who see them". Some might say that about Bigfoot. What about aliens? Same as ghosts? People are imagining it?

@WSA "I haven't a clue. Go ask somebody on an Alien or Ghost message board, I'd say! I have not active interest in those kinds of phenomenon, so I have no base of knowledge from which to speak intelligently about them."

Yes, but you did ask about shared legends and myth. UFOs, aliens, ghosts..those don't matter, even though they occur with the same, or even higher rate,as Bigfoot? And seem to be pretty global and ancient. Don't we have cave drawings of UFOs and aliens, or at least that we are calling that? Really? There are no parallels here?

[Guest]

Lost me. This, um, happened sometime this month? And you talk about me...?

Um, okay? See, here's another example. When you're caught in a contradiction you write something nebulous and then try to change the subject.

But the whole myth and allegory avenue can only take you so far.

Correct, and you're wrong if you think I think every person who's submitted a bigfoot report is willfully participating in campfire storytelling, made up whole cloth. I'm sure there are many people who absolutely believe they've seen a bigfoot. I've met some of those people here, in fact. If bigfoots are real, then some of those folks might even be correct in that they have seen a bigfoot.

[dmaker]

^^ Exactly. I have said it before, but I have no problem saying it again: although I do not believe that eye witness reports are due to an actual Bigfoot sighting, I do not think every one of them involves a liar doing his/her bit to perpetuate a myth. I feel I need to do this every now and then because I get accused by gentlemen like DWA of "making fun of" people that report sightings. But that accusation is unfair. Sure, I don't think they saw a Bigfoot, but I think in the vast majority of the reports that they think they saw a Bigfoot. No deliberate malice on their part, nor any on my part for not attributing the report to an animal that, I personally, do not think exists. And yes,much like Saskeptic above, if it turns out skeptics are wrong, then absolutely a number of those reports will have been from people that actually saw a Bigfoot.

Edited February 9, 2013 by dmaker