The Existance Of Bigfoot: Is The Magical/paranormal/spiritual/supernatural Really Necessary?

[Guest LarryP]

LarryP, you are a bit confused on how "proof" works.

Can I ask your opinion on something? You have been very vocal in this thread about providing proof of negatives. More so with Leftfoot, but also with norseman. How would you go about proving a negative? The rest of us have not found a way to do so, but you keep asking as if it can be done. Can you enlighten us?

This has nothing to do with proving a negative claim

Leftfoot made this very clear and declarative statement:

"Claims of psychic abilities, or any other otherworldly encounters with Bigfoot and the paranormal bits can safely disregarded because there's nothing within the laws of physics which suggest that psychic abilities, or anything of that nature, are even remotely possible."

Yet ever since he made this statement he hasn't even been able to identify which laws of physics he is referring to. And then he made the leap that not only are psychic abilities not possible for BF, they are aren't even remotely possible, period.

He is incorrect.

Dr. Dean Radin and many others have produced multiple peer reviewed studies on Psi phenomenon that do far more than just "suggest" that Psi phenomenon do in fact exist in humans.

**Edit**

Do yourself a favor, Leftfoot.

Stop the name calling.

Edited April 23, 2013 by LarryP
To Remove Offensive Content

[Guest]

This has nothing to do with proving a negative claim

Really? Could have fooled me.

Leftfoot made this very clear and declarative statement:

Yes, a negative claim. Perhaps this is what you are failing to comprihend?

"Claims of psychic abilities, or any other otherworldly encounters with Bigfoot and the paranormal bits can safely disregarded because there's nothing within the laws of physics which suggest that psychic abilities, or anything of that nature, are even remotely possible."

And that's what's called a negative claim. If there's nothing in the laws of physics that support it than it won't be there. If you claim otherwise, that there is something in the laws of physics that supports it it's up to you to provide it. How many times must I explain it to you before it sinks in with you?

Yet ever since he made this statement he hasn't even been able to identify which laws of physics he is referring to.

Oh, I don't know. Could it be because the burden of proof isn't on me?

And then he made the leap that not only are psychic abilities not possible for BF, they are aren't even remotely possible, period.

He is incorrect.

And it's up to you to provide evidence that I am incorrect. Is the burden of proof beginning to sink in yet?

Dr. Dean Radin and many others have produced multiple peer reviewed studies on Psi phenomenon that do far more than just "suggest" that Psi phenomenon do in fact exist in humans.

The one that proposes the idea of psychic activity so weak that it's impossible to proove? That Dean Radin? That's the best you got?

Stop the name calling.

*EDIT*

Edited April 23, 2013 by BigGinger
To Remove Offensive Content

[Guest LarryP]

The one that proposes the idea of psychic activity so weak that it's impossible to proove? That Dean Radin? That's the best you got?

He wasn't able to "proove" what exactly?

Have you read his publications?

Edited April 17, 2013 by LarryP

[Guest]

The one that proposes the idea of psychic activity so weak that it's impossible to proove? That Dean Radin? That's the best you got?

He wasn't able to "proove" what?

I usually edit out my quotes when replying because I like my posts neat and tidy. This time I'm making an exception because you obviously didn't read it.

It's right there in black and white. Here, let me point it out once more:

"[is he] The one that proposes the idea of psychic activity so weak that it's impossible to proove?"

That's the sum of what he's proposing. That the whole psychic phenomenum is so week that it's impossible to verify by scientific means.

This goes against the scientific method because that makes makes psi unfalsifiable. It's the equivalent to Carl Sagan's invisible dragon, Russel's teapot, or the invisible pink unicorn.

Have you read his publications?

I never even heard of this guy before today. Give me some time and I'll address more of his claims.

Edited April 17, 2013 by Leftfoot

[Guest LarryP]

The one that proposes the idea of psychic activity so weak that it's impossible to proove?"

That's the sum of what he's proposing. That the whole psychic phenomenum is so week that it's impossible to verify by scientific means.

followed by:

I never even heard of this guy before today.

WOW!

Maybe you have psychic abilities !

[Guest]

Or I know how to use Google.

... I wonder which is more likely.

[ThePhaige]

Wow this thread is still alive

Of course the Magical/paranormal/spiritual/supernatural are not necessary for the belief and discussions of SSq or even to prove SSq are bonafide, however when these listed criteria are observed then they are what they are, and then the term "necessary" becomes obsolete to the facts.

Its like the drunk who says he doesn't always get into trouble when he drinks, although every time hes in trouble he is drinking.

Not all Ssq encounters exhibit magical/paranormal/spiritual/supernatural or the like, but the ones that do .... do ... period.

[Guest]

Wow this thread is still alive

[Glados]At the end of the thread there will be counseling, and then there will be cake.[/Glados]

Not all Ssq encounters exhibit magical/paranormal/spiritual/supernatural or the like, but the ones that do .... do ... period.

Or there are rational explanations to those events in which case, those Magical/Paranormal/Spiritual/Supernatural don't apply.

This is where Occam's Razor and the KISS principle come into play.

[ThePhaige]

Or there are rational explanations to those events in which case, those Magical/Paranormal/Spiritual/Supernatural don't apply.

Orrrr they do

[Guest]

Or there are rational explanations to those events in which case, those Magical/Paranormal/Spiritual/Supernatural don't apply.

Orrrr they do

Hahah!

[Guest LarryP]

and the KISS principle come into play.

You've definitely got a lock on simple....

[Guest]

Simple is good, Larry

[Guest]

Did someone say cake?

What I think you are missing in his statement LarryP is the "nothing" part. I'll go out on a limb here and try to paraphrase Leftfoot (LF, please correct me if I am wrong.)

Given all the laws of physics, the subset of those laws that suggest psychic abilities are possible has a count of zero.

He has given you his subset of laws that support psi - the list is void, blank, contains no laws.

Now, since you disagree with his claim, it is your job to come back with which laws DO suggest such abilities.

Edited April 18, 2013 by Nod4Eight

[Guest]

Sounds about right.

[Guest JiggyPotamus]

Applying these supernatural traits and characteristics to bigfoot is extremely unnecessary, and in my opinion these ideas stem from the fact that we know so little about these animals. I mean look at it this way: an animal that is so sneaky in the forest, that can seemingly disappear by quickly ducking or dodging behind trees or other cover, is apt to get a reputation for being magical since no other animals out there are as adept at remaining unseen when they put their mind to it. I could definitely see Native American legends developing like this. The fact alone that these animals can be so big and scary is enough for the legend to develop that they are monsters, and eat people or whatever, but that does not mean these things are true.

So often times it seems as if these mystical qualities are a product of our limited understanding. Even what we deem paranormal today could probably be explained scientifically and logically, but we have not reached that level of understanding regarding what we are dealing with, and therefore these things remain mystical. The same goes for sasquatch. It is also entirely possible for theories such as mind control or telepathy between sasquatch and human to develop from the misinterpretation of what is actually going on during an encounter. When a person gets extremely frightened certain physiological changes take place within the body, causing various things to seem different. The senses are not going to operate at the same level, time can seem to slow down, etc. So even though a witness will be fully aware of what they are seeing, and will be able to recall certain details, there will be other aspects of the encounter for which the person will not be able to apply logic to. What I mean is best shown by an example.

A person who is deathly afraid during an encounter could possibly miss the fact that the sasquatch simply stepped behind the tree, and to them it could seem that it disappeard entirely, while the person was watching it the whole time. Things like this can lead to the paranormal ideas of sasquatch imo. Does this detract from the faith we should give to eyewitness encounters? Probably to an extent, but as I said, a person will usually know if what they are seeing is a sasquatch or not, as long as they have a decent view. Most people will not confuse a horse or a cow with a bigfoot, even if they don't really know what a bigfoot is. They will know that what they are seeing is not right. And the details that seem most prominent to them at the time are the details they will be able to recall more easily when recalling the story. It has been said that people could misjudge the height of bigfoot due to stress and fear during an encounter, and I think this is entirely plausible...Although it has also been said that most people tend to go shorter instead of taller, for whatever reason.

I could be wrong about all of this, but I think that misinterpretations of not only the person having the encounter, but those analyzing the encounter later, are what gave rise to the idea of the supernatural sasquatch. Plus, the fact that they are so intelligent, and therefore so elusive, makes it much easier to think something like they can see infrared beams and therefore avoid trailcams, as opposed to the idea that they simply smell the cameras, or see or hear them, associate them with humans or something not natural to the forest, and shy away from them. And the psychic sasquatch is easily explained, at least in my opinion, by the changes in physiology exhibited by a person during an encounter, as these changes could make it seem as if something were going on, since there is obviously going to be many mixed emotions and thoughts all occurring at the same time. But then again, maybe sasquatch is psychic. It just does not seem very logical.

And contrary to popular opinion, the entire idea of sasquatch is actually logical, although this is hard to grasp without understanding how intelligent these animals really are. And it also seems logical that such intelligence can often be mistaken or misinterpreted as something paranormal, because otherwise one would have to admit that not only is there something out there in the woods that could crush a human in one blow, but it may also be able to compete with humans in a mental fashion on some levels. It is scary in a way. Good thing they are docile.