Jump to content

Are Bigfoot Believers Too Eager To Believe?


dopelyrics

Recommended Posts

It's likely that there are more pics of real BFs that are declared to be hoaxes or "bears", than hoaxes that are declared to be real.

As a matter of fact, I don't recall ever seeing one that was pronounced "real". Maybe people are too afraid of being thought of as gullible to allow themselves to see what's really there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm surprised that a person who has seen actually seen one would take that position. I would take the exact opposite position. There is no way in hell that most of the videos on Youtube are authentic! I would quantify my experience by saying that 95% of the videos I have seen are completely obvious fakes, 4.8% I highly suspect of being fake, 0.2% I consider might possibly be authentic. Those figures are being generous. I can think of maybe two or three videos that I think might possibly be authentic.

Edited by Irish73
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm surprised that a person who has seen actually seen one would take that position. I would take the exact opposite position. There is no way in hell that most of the videos on Youtube are authentic! I would quantify my experience by saying that 95% of the videos I have seen are completely obvious fakes, 4.8% I highly suspect of being fake, 0.2% I consider might possibly be authentic. Those figures are being generous. I can think of maybe two or three videos that I think might possibly be authentic.

I don't believe that is what Sasfooty meant; re-read her first sentence. Unless I have got it wrong :unsure:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thank you Violet. You are right.

I didn't imply that most of the videos on YouTube are authentic, & I agree that most are hoaxes.

I'm talking about the ones that are good enough to make it here for discussion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not at all, we just keep an open mind towards the subject of Sasquatch. Some of us don't even believe in UFO's.

To those that have seen them, they know most evidence is real. To the rest we tend to have more questions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest mdhunter

This is an excellent thread. Thanks DL.

Tons of good posts. I especially liked yours BFS.

I would say some are gullible, but I see a vast array of personalities and views. That's a good thing. I think some people are seeking validation for what they saw. I personally look at everything with heavy scrutiny.

Somebody brought up the ridicule thing. I have been the subject of ridicule for comparatively mundane species such as coyotes, cougar, and whitetail deer. Only to be proven correct in their existence/habits in certain areas. I don't ridicule "knowers". I've known a couple personally over the years. I've spent a lot of time (over several years) in an area that has a history older than the PGF. By far, I've had more unexplained events in that area than anywhere. Never had close enough encounter to fully satisfy my mind. The funny thing is I didn't know the areas history until after many of these happenings.I will just say that "peekers" and rock throwing (amongst other things) is quite familiar to me. I'm not ready to take the leap, but the list of other possibilities is very short.

The "knowers" that I have known personally share one thing in common. They spend an abnormal amount of time in the outdoors and were involved in the outdoors professionally. I believe they saw what they said they saw (hoax or not to be revealed). I also knew them for a couple years or more before they told me of their encounters. If that makes me gullible then I am gullible.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest krakatoa

The mind is a funny thing. The "truth" of an experience can be easily distorted no matter what your related experience level is. Indeed, even "knowing" something cannot always prevent you from experiencing something else altogether.

Example, the McGurk effect:

Your mind can also be misled with simple words instructing you on what you are hearing, versus what is actually being said:

(Apologies ahead of time for adding a "political" video, but it was presented on the news and demonstrates clearly how easily you "hear" what you are told to hear. I beg of you, please take this for instructional purposes only, and don't descend into political debate here.)

Point being, you will quite often also "see" what you are told, or what you are predisposed, to see.

This is how illusionists make a living.

I'd like to head off any negative reactions to this by saying I'm not making a value judgement on those who are fooled by hoaxes. Rather, in almost all cases, everyone should have a good laugh over getting caught being human.

Nor am I saying that all those who claim to see bigfoots are not actually seeing bigfoots.

Just pointing out that it is exceedingly easy to fool others and yourself into experiencing all sorts of things that do not exist.

Skeptics are not immune to the same effect. The difference, I think, is that true skeptics (contra "skofftics" or "true believers") will enjoy the exercise of seeing through the illusions as much as they would enjoy seeing the real thing.

I like to think that a true skeptic can be a bigfoot believer. I think Art72 embodies that, as do others on this and other sites.

But, and I cannot stress this enough, it is important to accept that skepticism is a practice and not a state of being. Illusions and biases play havoc with almost everyone's perception at one time or another. Being able to step back from initial impressions and objectively reassess all the data is paramount to determining what that data actually represents.

One may choose not to pursue that course, and simply believe everything that supports their side of the issue, and summarily dismiss all that conflicts. This is often the most comfortable of paths, but it leaves one with little respect outside their own cohort, and limits interaction to the most rudimentary of discourse.

Skeptical inquiry may not be the most immediately gratifying of ways to pursue the mystery of Bigfoot, but I think that ultimately, it is the most likely of approaches to satisfy believers and naysayers alike.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

SSR Team

Believers are, for sure.

There's no way i would even entertain this subject if i hadn't seen one, no way at all.

Believe it or not and even though i know i'm one of a very, very few people on the planet to have seen these things and am very, very lucky to have done so, i sometimes which i hadn't because it makes me gullible to stuff like this " person " ( this is not the Tar Pit so i have to say " person " ) Dyer does which makes me angry with myself because there are literally no other areas in my life that i'm gullible in, except for this subject.

& that's starting to bug me, big time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

SSR Team

Maybe both skeptics and believers are more inclined in either direction based on how they are wired.

Skeptics are right to be skeptics but are ultimately wrong and believers, in my opinion, are full of romance,

Knowers however are quite possibly the quietest of the three groups on this forum.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think bigfoot believers are any more gullible than anyone else.

Before my experiences, I was open to the possibility that there are more things under the sun than I can explain.

After my experiences, I KNOW there is much more out there than I have an explanation for, that doesn't fit into a particularly tidy worldview.

At least I've heard and possibly seen bigfoot to back up my belief in it.

Edited by slabdog
Remove religious comment
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest mdhunter

What Bobby O said about knowers is the point I was trying to make in my post. These guys that I've known that are knowers were very quiet about it in public. They had to really know you to talk about it. That was the same way I became over coyote and cougar sightings in the east.Coyotes ,I talk openly about now because they "exist". Part of why I lend huge credence to their words. Because we talked about why we didn't talk about such things in public. We talked in depth about possibilities,hoaxes, mis-ID, etc.

These guys are SKEPTICAL like me. It's not like I just met them kind of thing.They tell me what they think I've seen but I'm too skeptical to jump off that cliff. That's how I'm wired. If it was 10-20 feet and I saw what they claim I'd be in the boat with them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...