Jump to content
TD-40

Why Patterson And Gimlim Were Successful That Day.

Recommended Posts

dmaker

And how exactly would Bigfoot evidence hold up to scrutiny in the abscence of an actual Bigfoot exactly? What scrutiny is that held up to exactly? The confirmation of other footers? Or should we say held up to scientific scrutiny? In which case Bigfoot evidence always loses?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

Dmaker, and if I could name two or three or ten or twenty serious scientists(whatever that means) that consider the weight of evidence to point towards the existence of an unknown hairy biped instead of against it? Would that be enough? Again I ask how many would be enough? Are Masters degrees okay? Or do they need to be PHDs? In what fields are you okay with these scientists having degrees? Any Profs anathema when it comes to granting doctorates?

 

PS Your statement that every species on North America has been documented is laughable. I'd ask you for a link to where you got that tidbit, but LOL...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Bigfoothunter

And how exactly would Bigfoot evidence hold up to scrutiny in the abscence of an actual Bigfoot exactly?

 

It would be evidence that cannot be sensibly demonstrated as to how it was accomplished by artificial means.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
SweatyYeti

 

And how exactly would Bigfoot evidence hold up to scrutiny in the abscence of an actual Bigfoot exactly?

 

It would be evidence that cannot be sensibly demonstrated as to how it was accomplished by artificial means.

 

 

 

Like...little ol' Patty... ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
dmaker

Dmaker, and if I could name two or three or ten or twenty serious scientists(whatever that means) that consider the weight of evidence to point towards the existence of an unknown hairy biped instead of against it? Would that be enough? Again I ask how many would be enough? Are Masters degrees okay? Or do they need to be PHDs? In what fields are you okay with these scientists having degrees? Any Profs anathema when it comes to granting doctorates?

 

PS Your statement that every species on North America has been documented is laughable. I'd ask you for a link to where you got that tidbit, but LOL...

 

I said almost every other animal, not all. But I will concede to you that the fossil record is by no means complete. Could you, however, provide an example of another 800 lb mammal running around our forests and backyards for which we have no fossil record? In fact, no physical record at all that has been confirmed. If you cannot do so, then the lack of fossil record for Bigfoot remains a damning tell tale. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Bigfoothunter

 

I said almost every other animal, not all. But I will concede to you that the fossil record is by no means complete. Could you, however, provide an example of another 800 lb mammal running around our forests and backyards for which we have no fossil record? In fact, no physical record at all that has been confirmed. If you cannot do so, then the lack of fossil record for Bigfoot remains a damning tell tale. 

 

 

I don't think anyone can prove the Gorilla exist by way of a fossil record either. And I think your characterization is a tad bent when you describe them as running around in our backyards. I often refer to the mountains surrounding Lake Harrison as my back yard, but I understand that description lessens the reality of the terrain these animals appear to live in. There is no one that I have ever met that could come close to maneuvering over the terrain these creatures appear to do in an effort to catch one. And in the 12 years I have spent looking for the creature, I have never met anyone during my travels who was out there looking for the creature too. I also disagree that no physical evidence at all has been confirmed for footprints have been confirmed .... maybe not accepted by all, but confirmed nether-the-less. In the case of the P/G film, it not only shows the creature, but the trackway it left on that sandbar. On site confirmations were made soon afterwards as well.

 

Skeptics have tried to explain the tracks left behind by suggesting they were all hand dug by hand ... that a scaffold was built to keep Roger and Bob off the remaining sandbar between these alleged hand dug tracks to then suggesting that all one needed to do is trowel the sandbar to smooth out any unwanted evidence. In this case it has been the track evidence that film and trackway that has outweighed the rumors and innuendos.

Edited by Bigfoothunter

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

Gigantopithecus comes to mind, it is after all an 800lb ape. Very few fossils of it have been found anywhere. I don't find it implausible that there are fossils of it here that scientists haven't found, or may be buried in museum basements. I know you, however, won't believe that a Gigantopithecus tooth has anything to do with bigfoot even if one is found in North America.

 

You dodged my question on how many scientists you need to pay attention to Bigfoot before they can be taken seriously and what credentials they need to satisfy your standards.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Squatchy McSquatch

If all it takes is one proven on film this would have been nailed shut 50 years ago.

 

How many Bigfeetses will it take for science to stand up recognize?

 

Just one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
dmaker

Gigantopithecus comes to mind, it is after all an 800lb ape. Very few fossils of it have been found anywhere. I don't find it implausible that there are fossils of it here that scientists haven't found, or may be buried in museum basements. I know you, however, won't believe that a Gigantopithecus tooth has anything to do with bigfoot even if one is found in North America.

 

You dodged my question on how many scientists you need to pay attention to Bigfoot before they can be taken seriously and what credentials they need to satisfy your standards.

I said extant. G.Blacki is not currently running amok anywhere and has not for quite some time.

 

I only commented on the tiny number of scientists that openly take Bigfoot seriously. I don't know why that makes you think I have some standard as to how many need to being looking into it. In my mind that number  is zero. Why would they bother when they have real animals to study?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

You said how many 800lb animals are running around without a fossil record. I pointed out out there is, in fact, a fossil record for 800lb apes.  Extant is a another topic altogether. If you're willing to tell eyewitnesses what they saw without standing beside them(per your conversation with LarryP in a different thread), then there is no hope talking about it.

 

 The fact is, there are scientists, real scientists, studying bigfoot. Anthropologists, biologists etc. You say there are a tiny number, as if that dismisses them from the conversation. I'd like to know your magic number of scientists that suddenly gives a field credibility, not how many you think are needed. 

 

Your logic, we don't need no stinking scientists to look into Bigfoot because I don't think they exist, kind of takes the exploration out of science, no? How many discoveries would not have been made if armchair critics like you were running the show? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
SweatyYeti

 

 

Your logic, we don't need no stinking scientists to look into Bigfoot because I don't think they exist, kind of takes the exploration out of science, no?

 

How many discoveries would not have been made if armchair critics like you were running the show? 

 

 

As Albert Einstein put it, stinky... :) ...

 

"The most beautiful thing we can experience is the mysterious. It is the source of all true art and all science. He to whom this emotion is a stranger, who can no longer pause to wonder and stand rapt in awe, is as good as dead: his eyes are closed."

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Bigfoothunter

 

Gigantopithecus comes to mind, it is after all an 800lb ape. Very few fossils of it have been found anywhere. I don't find it implausible that there are fossils of it here that scientists haven't found, or may be buried in museum basements. I know you, however, won't believe that a Gigantopithecus tooth has anything to do with bigfoot even if one is found in North America.

 

You dodged my question on how many scientists you need to pay attention to Bigfoot before they can be taken seriously and what credentials they need to satisfy your standards.

I said extant. G.Blacki is not currently running amok anywhere and has not for quite some time.

 

I only commented on the tiny number of scientists that openly take Bigfoot seriously. I don't know why that makes you think I have some standard as to how many need to being looking into it. In my mind that number  is zero. Why would they bother when they have real animals to study?

 

 

I understand why science has little interest in the subject as they must deal with what can be placed in front of them. So until that happens - it really isn't a matter for science as much as it is a matter for investigators. It's the investigator in the field that is left to decide whether the evidence is real or manufactured and in there lies the great debate. And while it is true that with such investigators there have been many instances where evidence was without a doubt been found to have been fabricated, there is also evidence that defies being fabricated and has by all appearances been left behind by a real living creature. If scientist have any blame at all in the whole affair, it is that they have deeper pockets than those few of us that spend our own time and money looking for the animal and evaluating the evidence as it is found. And like I have said before ... it is as much of a myth that people are out combing the bush looking for the Sasquatch as it is to those who think the Sasquatch is little more than a myth. Perhaps the reason for this is that to do one it is hard, time consuming, and costly to those doing it while doing nothing is easy, takes no time, and its free.

Edited by Bigfoothunter

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
dmaker

You said how many 800lb animals are running around without a fossil record. I pointed out out there is, in fact, a fossil record for 800lb apes.  Extant is a another topic altogether. If you're willing to tell eyewitnesses what they saw without standing beside them(per your conversation with LarryP in a different thread), then there is no hope talking about it.

 

 The fact is, there are scientists, real scientists, studying bigfoot. Anthropologists, biologists etc. You say there are a tiny number, as if that dismisses them from the conversation. I'd like to know your magic number of scientists that suddenly gives a field credibility, not how many you think are needed. 

 

Your logic, we don't need no stinking scientists to look into Bigfoot because I don't think they exist, kind of takes the exploration out of science, no? How many discoveries would not have been made if armchair critics like you were running the show? 

Again, you are missing my meaning. I said how many 800lb animals are running around our forests and backyards ( based on the accounts) without a fossil record? Now it seems pretty obvious that extant is implied since extinct creatures are not able to run anywhere. 

 

I am not trying to take the exploration out of science. But I do think science should avoid the pointless. And Bigfoot is pointless. There is no compelling reason to spend time and money on that when it could be better spent elsewhere. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

And you are missing my point, there is a fossil record of 800lb apes. Bigfoot is purportedly an 800lb ape. Therefore there is a fossil record that may link to Bigfoot. Sooooo perhaps there are precisely zero species of 800lb animals running around with no fossil records. And I fully expect you to twist this to try and prove your point, but whatever.

 

As to the scientists, your arrogance is still shocking and amazes me. As long as you think something is pointless, then by definition it's pointless? l'm not even going to argue anymore. Adios.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Bigfoothunter
 Bigfoot is pointless. There is no compelling reason to spend time and money on that when it could be better spent elsewhere. 

 

 

Like studying the effects of cow farts on the Ozone? If there are messages from other galaxies being sent through space? Just as pointless to some folks and yet do not these things get funding in the name of science.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...