WSA Posted March 14, 2013 Share Posted March 14, 2013 Oooo....hold my calls and fetch me a cold drink y'all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drew Posted March 14, 2013 Share Posted March 14, 2013 If seeing bigfoot equaled 'successful' there'd be a lot of successful Bigfooters out there. Seeing bigfoot however, does not equal successful. Simply seeing bigfoot just throws your sighting on the pile of sightings. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest DWA Posted March 14, 2013 Share Posted March 14, 2013 Unless you are the one who saw it. When I see one, it's proven, to the only person who matters to me. As to their getting together the documentation, science tends not to work on a next-day basis, and they're doing this in their free time. I can wait. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted March 14, 2013 Share Posted March 14, 2013 (edited) If seeing bigfoot equaled 'successful' there'd be a lot of successful Bigfooters out there. Seeing bigfoot however, does not equal successful. Simply seeing bigfoot just throws your sighting on the pile of sightings. Seeing a Sasquatch does equal success if most of the members only goal is to see one with their own eyes. That would be enough proof for me. There are enthusiasts (besides storytelling "habituators" living in fantasyland) whose primary objective is just to satiate their own curiosity. Edited March 14, 2013 by Irish73 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted March 15, 2013 Share Posted March 15, 2013 (edited) You mean successful as an NPO, or successful in the hunt for Bigfoot? Surely you don't mean the latter. Both. Researchers can achieve some level of success without accomplishing their stated goals. All science is a game of incremental advance. We know more now than we knew last year or the year before. We are successful, though our ultimate goals remain unrealized. Edited March 15, 2013 by bipto Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drew Posted March 15, 2013 Share Posted March 15, 2013 How long until you start to doubt that you are actually seeing Wood Apes? I mean, 10 years from now, if you are still unable to corral one of them, will you start to question your own sighting? 5 years? 2 years? You said you were sure that they were wood apes, and yet you don't have the ape. At what point will you say, either 'they are supernatural creatures', or 'we were mistaken'? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted March 15, 2013 Share Posted March 15, 2013 Sorry, Drew, what has been seen cannot be unseen. These are flesh and blood primates, period. We won't stop until the animal is either protected or were dead by trying to get them that way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest DWA Posted March 15, 2013 Share Posted March 15, 2013 Drew say wha? We can't make Drew happy so we're mistaken? Dude! You are making your own head hurt here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chelefoot Posted March 17, 2013 Share Posted March 17, 2013 V-what? Sorry Bipto, My phone made that post! (It really has a mind of it's own ) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted March 18, 2013 Share Posted March 18, 2013 Bitpo ~ "These are flesh and blood primates, period. We won't stop until the animal is either protected or were dead by trying to get them that way." History and all those accursed sciences - you know...those enimies, say otherwise. You and your pals will surely die, as will I. Hopefully within about 80 years or so of quality life. But it is very very unlikely you or anyone will have to die by means of trying to protect an animal that has not not yet been described, catagorized, documented or proven to exist using a system we have historically used to successfully eradicate diseases, identify and catagorize DNA, expand the human life-span from 30 years or so to 70 years or so and accomplished what our ancestores thought would be beyond comprehension. The scientific method. But trudge on my friends. Some like to bowl. Some like to golf....others like to surf. It's all good. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted March 18, 2013 Share Posted March 18, 2013 (edited) How long until you start to doubt that you are actually seeing Wood Apes? I mean, 10 years from now, if you are still unable to corral one of them, will you start to question your own sighting? 5 years? 2 years? You said you were sure that they were wood apes, and yet you don't have the ape. At what point will you say, either 'they are supernatural creatures', or 'we were mistaken'? Bipto seems quite sure what he has seen. Just because he can't produce one on demand doesn't mean he didn't see it, or it doesn't exist. There are all manner of things that people probably believe exist, that they cannot personally produce physical evidence of. Edited March 18, 2013 by BigGinger To remove content in violation of BFF Rules Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest DWA Posted March 18, 2013 Share Posted March 18, 2013 I've seen plenty of deer. I might be able to give you evidence of one or two of them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted March 18, 2013 Share Posted March 18, 2013 (edited) Yes? So? Do you not see the fault of that reasoning? What if Bipto said he saw a two inch tall human, or a spotted Zebra, or a flying snail? THAT wouldn't mean he didn't see it/them, or that they don't exist, right? Right? By extension, right? Irish73 ~ " There are all manner of things that people probably believe exist, that they cannot personally produce physical evidence of." Yes yes of course. So which are true? What possible method could anyone use to determin what to "believe" and what is, actually, real? Well, shucks, it would take a thousand years or more to come up with a reasonable, logical mechanism or method to use which would allow us to objectively interprete our world around us and decide (again, using LOGIC) what is to the best of our determination real, or not real. Well let's all get to work on that right n---wait. We don't have to! I forgot. We already have a machanism or method that to this date has laid waste to disease, rumors, false cures, disease and the belief in myths. It's called science. Edited March 18, 2013 by WTB1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest DWA Posted March 18, 2013 Share Posted March 18, 2013 Right. All of it. You aren't quite sure how this works are you? If bipto saw any one of those things, how would you prove he was wrong? Um, er, you couldn't. See how this works now? You have been duped by too many scientists who don't know what their job is. Scientists aren't supposed to scoff. They are supposed to solve. Bigfoot is their job. They just don't know it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted March 18, 2013 Share Posted March 18, 2013 But it is very very unlikely you or anyone will have to die by means of trying to protect an animal that has not not yet been described, catagorized, documented or proven to exist... Do you understand that that is exactly our goal? And our very point? You can't protect a unicorn or its environment. Nor can you protect bigfoot. To accomplish that, it needs to be real. We know how to prove it. That's our objective. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts