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

[dmaker]

@DWA,

"EVIDENCE DOES NOT NEED TO CONSTITUTE PROOF! 99.9999999999999999999999999% of all the evidence in scientific history has proven nothing. But it pointed the way to something. THIS - this that you don't (still!) understand - is the difference between evidence and proof."

Again, please reread my posts. I very clearly said your evidence exists and YOU SHOULD FOLLOW IT TO PROOF. How is that not pointing the way to something? What am I not understanding? We just said the same thing in not even very different words, yet you still cling to this notion that I am not understanding you. Why is that exactly?

[Guest DWA]

^^^^Because you keep saying that because we don't have proof, bigfoot's probably not real.

Why is that exactly?

Edited February 22, 2013 by DWA

[dmaker]

Its a point well taken ...BUT we dont have track cast hair samples and videos of werewolfs...we do of BF

Uhm, yes we do. Have you never seen the Dogman found footage? Oh, it turned out to be a hoax in the end, but it was on Monsterquest or something and people were believing it for a bit. I guess BF footage never turns out to be a hoax either, does it?

^^^^Because you keep saying that because we don't have proof, bigfoot's probably not real.

Why is that exactly?

Wrong again. That is not what I am saying. I find the very notion of Bigfoot as a biological possibility absurd. Not even just his existence but his ability to evade detection, capture and leaving any viable trace behind. I find the whole thing about as credible as the Tooth Fairy. It's got nothing to do with your proof. Bigfoot is probably not real because he is a childish fantasy. But go ahead and pursue your evidence and hope it leads you to a discovery. I will happily eat crow while loudly applauding your efforts and accomplishments. I just happen to think you're wasting your time.

[Guest DWA]

Then, you are just ignoring the evidence.

Which says he ain't evading nothing but willfully ignorant people and is leaving every kind of trace an animal leaves.

And I would say that if you insist on doing that, and you, um, actually bought Bindernagel's book? then you are probably wasting yours. He writes for open minds.

You can keep your stance if ...um, if it feels, um, better than, er, ah, it sounds like it does.

But mine's more fun. Particularly for somebody making, you know, oodles of posts at, er, ah, a, um, you know, bigfoot website (see RedQuote below).

Edited February 22, 2013 by DWA

[norseman]

Uhm, yes we do. Have you never seen the Dogman found footage? Oh, it turned out to be a hoax in the end, but it was on Monsterquest or something and people were believing it for a bit. I guess BF footage never turns out to be a hoax either, does it?

I never believed that video from day one. To me in the knees and leg area it looked like a human on all fours...........or some sort of giant dog/rabbit hybrid.

And of course there has been hoaxing in the BF community. But in the case of the PGF? No one has ever debunked it. I think Werewolf vs. Bigfoot analogy is just a bad analogy. I think a much better analogy is Bigfoot vs. Tasmanian Tiger. Something that is known to have existed but no longer exists. Now to be fair the Tiger blinked out very recently and sightings are from the same area it blinked out in. So Bigfoot is much more of a stretch concerning a extinct ape in Asia that fits the description.

I'm not much of a Werewolf guru, but from what I understand through folklore, a Werewolf is a human that shape shifts back and forth. We are not talking about a biological creature.........we are talking about Voodoo, Witchcraft, whatever..........

[dmaker]

Yes, I bought Bindernagels' book. It hasn't arrived yet as he is on vacation right now. It's just as well since I'm up to my eyeballs in routers and switches right now cramming for an exam.

I am not ignoring the evidence. And while I am open minded, I am not easily swayed. There needs to be more convincing evidence than there is right now. And I'm sorry but 3,000 or 10,000 or 50,000 anecdotal reports are not going to convince me of anything at this point. I'm looking forward to Bindernagel's book. Maybe it will unclench my mind a bit, who knows? ...yes, I see your red quote. Hard not to since it's red and all and you like to point to it or the green one daily. Do you like my attached photo below? It's an ablino bigfoot in a snow storm. I'm thinking having having FB/FB analyze it and tell me how many points it confirms on

Hey Norse, you should acquaint yourself with the BF fringe. Particularly the flashlight eyeballs, dimension hoping, mind reading, space traveling claims. They make a werewolf seem downright probable. Though speaking of, there used to be quite a few people that believed in lycanthropy at one point in the not too, too distant past. Mabye some day people will be saying that about Bigfoot long after you and I and DWA/WSA are arguing in the after life.

Edited February 22, 2013 by dmaker

[Guest DWA]

Yes, I bought Bindernagels' book. It hasn't arrived yet as he is on vacation right now. It's just as well since I'm up to my eyeballs in routers and switches right now cramming for an exam.

I am not ignoring the evidence. And while I am open minded, I am not easily swayed. There needs to be more convincing evidence than there is right now. And I'm sorry but 3,000 or 10,000 or 50,000 anecdotal reports are not going to convince me of anything at this point. I'm looking forward to Bindernagel's book. Maybe it will unclench my mind a bit, who knows? ...yes, I see your red quote. Hard not to since it's red and all and you like to point to it or the green one daily. Do you like my attached photo below? It's an ablino bigfoot in a snow storm. I'm thinking having FB/FB tell me how many points it confirms on

FB/FB is a sideshow, strictly for laughs, like about 90% of this field. That's what happens when science abandons the stage to amateurs, who combine almost no time with varying degrees of attention to the relevant science.

Those quotes are to be read. They just highlight that bigfoot skeptics is veddy eentelesting pipples.

[dmaker]

DWA, I'm curious why you think that anyone who "acquaints" themselves with the evidence is guaranteed to arrive at the same conclusion as you? And anyone who doesn't hasn't read it with an open mind. You dismiss people for not examining the evidence, but even if someone has you still dismiss them since they clearly didn't do it properly as they failed to arrive at the same conclusion as you.

That's not a bit closed minded?

[Guest DWA]

^^^Haven't we answered this? More than once?

Yes.

When responses to what I say do not contest the evidence in any meaningful way, and my queries as to what is going on there don't yield any meaningful response, I know where the closed mind is.

If I tossed my opinion that the sun was a heat lamp made by Whirlpool up on a solar-science board, and the scientists on that board continued, over and over, to try to reason with me instead of sooner, rather than later, ushering me somewhere safe, ...now one has an idea what goes on here with serious proponents talking to bigfoot skeptics ...who are, by the strictest and most correct definition of that word, generally not serious about this, as their rhetoric steadfastly avoids the evidence, skirts direct contest with the solid points of the scientific proponents, and refuses to acknowledge their obligation to make a case for their contention that all alleged bigfoot evidence is, in fact, evidence of something else.

ANY response that says 'bigfoot ain't real' is closed-minded, by the strictest and most correct definition possible of the phrase, unless it proceeds to solidly and incontrovertibly prove that all the evidence is, in fact, evidence of something else.

If one does not get this, one might have a problem with scientific topics. This is the most critical barrier to cryptozoology being taken seriously: it does not exclude viewpoints not in consonance with the scientific method.

Skepticism is science. If it addresses the evidence. Otherwise, it is not skepticism, but true belief.

Edited February 22, 2013 by DWA

[norseman]

Yes, I bought Bindernagels' book. It hasn't arrived yet as he is on vacation right now. It's just as well since I'm up to my eyeballs in routers and switches right now cramming for an exam.

I am not ignoring the evidence. And while I am open minded, I am not easily swayed. There needs to be more convincing evidence than there is right now. And I'm sorry but 3,000 or 10,000 or 50,000 anecdotal reports are not going to convince me of anything at this point. I'm looking forward to Bindernagel's book. Maybe it will unclench my mind a bit, who knows? ...yes, I see your red quote. Hard not to since it's red and all and you like to point to it or the green one daily. Do you like my attached photo below? It's an ablino bigfoot in a snow storm. I'm thinking having having FB/FB analyze it and tell me how many points it confirms on

I hear you I really do. I for one am not asking you to be swayed with anecdotal reports and neither should science be.

But do you see my dilemma? I'm trying to bag one for you so that it is proven to exist. So I don't have the luxury of just filing all those reports in the trash can. What have people reported that I can find useful in my pursuit? There is no book called "A hunter's guide to Sasquatch", in which I can peruse through hunting tactics and strap my boots on and go out there and copy. In another thread we are debating how much of a predator the Squatch is..........in other words is it more productive to set out fruit bait station and wait? Or is it more productive to use a dying rabbit call? Thus far I have been using calls, with no success other than bear.

Hey Norse, you should acquaint yourself with the BF fringe. Particularly the flashlight eyeballs, dimension hoping, mind reading, space traveling claims. They make a werewolf seem downright probable. Though speaking of, there used to be quite a few people that believed in lycanthropy at one point in the not too, too distant past. Mabye some day people will be saying that about Bigfoot long after you and I and DWA/WSA are arguing in the after life.

I think the human mind is good or bad (however you want to look at it) with filling in the blanks concerning the unknown. From Mars canals that equated a Martian alien culture to Bigfoot being a shape shifting alien.

But I know that the tracks I observed that day were real, and since I do not put much stock in the paranormal, I tend to believe some biological animal left them there.........and that is really all I have to go on.

http://www.bigfootencounters.com/sbs/keller-WA09.htm

Something made that track.........it's not a trick of the human mind. Something bipedal with a eight foot stride. If you have a logical explanation I would truly love to hear it. Whether it be a hoax or a known animal. The problem I have with skeptics is that when faced with pretty compelling evidence they punt. In other words.......they simply cannot explain it so they hit the reset button and say "It's impossible for Squatch to exist". They cannot wrap their head around it, therefore they just ignore it and move on.

I live here.......so I don't have that luxury. If those tracks represent what I think they represent I **** sure want to know about it. I want some sort of finality to my knowledge. Most of my life I'VE IGNORED IT, and relied on others to tell me what it is or isn't. But unfortunately those answers are not forth coming. So like a formation of a volunteer fire dept. instead of neighbors scratching their heads and watching some friends house burn down? Your forced to become proactive.

I've become impatient, and I've watched many Bigfooters blunder around long enough......without the means of truly solving the mystery. You cringe every time I mention Todd Standing.......but it dove tails in with my argument so well. There is no smoking gun picture that is going to solve this mystery. Until Bobo and Matt Money maker start packing large caliber hunting rifles? And get refined in their bushcraft? I guess I'll keep strapping on my boots and trying to do it on my own.

[WSA]

I think it is waaaaay past the point where many here should just come out and say it:

"I don't know, and can't plausibly explain, what causes these tracks/sightings/sounds."

Really, long past the point.

The truth will set you free, as they say. Just drop the pretense and the pseudo-scientific jabber. You can do it. C'mon. Won't hurt a bit.

It is all I've ever said on this topic, and I don't count myself a failure for admitting it. Until the evidence is pursued relentlessly, we'll never have that answer. Your assistance is requested.

[Guest]

DWA. Just as a quick aside, your heat lamp example is faulty. Whirpool sucks. Scientists would for sure use Coleman.

[dmaker]

WSA,

"I don't know, and can't plausibly explain, what causes these tracks/sightings/sounds."

I do say that, I have no problem saying that. I have a problem with leaping to the conclusion that it must be an unknown animal. I can't explain it. It is by far not my specialty or area of expertise. But I would be one surprised individual if there was not some sort of explanation for it that does not in any way involve Bigfoot.

Oh and Norse, if you believe Rick Dyer, then apparently ribs work great

Edited February 22, 2013 by dmaker

[norseman]

I think it is waaaaay past the point where many here should just come out and say it:

"I don't know, and can't plausibly explain, what causes these tracks/sightings/sounds."

Really, long past the point.

The truth will set you free, as they say. Just drop the pretense and the pseudo-scientific jabber. You can do it. C'mon. Won't hurt a bit.

It is all I've ever said on this topic, and I don't count myself a failure for admitting it. Until the evidence is pursued relentlessly, we'll never have that answer. Your assistance is requested.

I understand for many this mystery does not effect them directly. And it's an easy thing to play the odds and say "Squatch is absolutely a myth".

I've seen tracks, the link above is right across the river from my house. I really don't have the luxury to sit back and play the odds. If I'm cohabitating with a giant ape.........even if it's a .01 chance? I freakin want to know about it. And I've come to the realization that I cannot rely on the "experts" to answer this question for me.

I've personally decided over the years to become proactive.

WSA,

"I don't know, and can't plausibly explain, what causes these tracks/sightings/sounds."

I do say that, I have no problem saying that. I have a problem with leaping to the conclusion that it must be an unknown animal. I can't explain it. It is by far not my specialty or area of expertise. But I would be one surprised individual if there was not some sort of explanation for it that does not in any way involve Bigfoot.

Oh and Norse, if you believe Rick Dyer, then apparently ribs work great

Rick Dyer couldn't find his *** with both hands........

But apparently somebody finds him competent, he didn't buy that Mercedes Benz SUV with his good looks. But the important point is that people like him is a major reason why skeptics find the whole thing laughable.

I hope every skeptic in this thread knows that I would never lie to them. Either it happened or it didn't........which I'm sure makes for some very boring field work. Which means nobody will be buying me my own SUV anytime soon.

Edited February 22, 2013 by norseman

[Guest DWA]

DWA. Just as a quick aside, your heat lamp example is faulty. Whirpool sucks. Scientists would for sure use Coleman.

I was trying to make my example as unbelievable as possible to make the analogy as exact as I could, so actually, mission accomplished.

The first scientist in fact shot back: ------- whirlpool are you a troll? ------------

I think it is waaaaay past the point where many here should just come out and say it:

"I don't know, and can't plausibly explain, what causes these tracks/sightings/sounds."

Really, long past the point.

The truth will set you free, as they say. Just drop the pretense and the pseudo-scientific jabber. You can do it. C'mon. Won't hurt a bit.

It is all I've ever said on this topic, and I don't count myself a failure for admitting it. Until the evidence is pursued relentlessly, we'll never have that answer. Your assistance is requested.

I have one word for you, Believer:

Paree doilies.

(That's one word, a shrink told me.)

Edited February 22, 2013 by DWA