MIB Posted May 20, 2013 Moderator Share Posted May 20, 2013 Too blurry. Lot of chance for mis identification ... lynx, or even a (drum roll ...) blob-cat. MIB Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
norseman Posted May 20, 2013 Share Posted May 20, 2013 Its obviously a dude in a cat suit! Look at the stomach area and how the suit just hangs there all loose......dead give away its a suit! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest DWA Posted May 20, 2013 Share Posted May 20, 2013 The paws clearly have FINGERS, hel-lo-o-o-! Bob Hieronymous: a busy man. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dmaker Posted May 21, 2013 Share Posted May 21, 2013 I don't know, the picture is kind of fuzzy so it could be a Sasquatch. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rockape Posted May 21, 2013 Share Posted May 21, 2013 It's just a bear. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted May 22, 2013 Share Posted May 22, 2013 (edited) So, aside from my aborted attempt to take this forum back up a while back, I haven't paid any attention to this stuff in years. I just took the time to read all 15 pages of this thread (I know, I know...) and while it doesn't seem to have elightened me anymore than I was so long ago, it does beg to me to ask, If DWA and dmaker argue in the woods and no one can hear them, do they make a sound? Also: The guy in the cat suit is clearly flipping the photographer the bird with his right hand. Sloppy. Edited May 22, 2013 by make-me-believe Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Cervelo Posted May 22, 2013 Share Posted May 22, 2013 Glad someone finally caught it!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted May 22, 2013 Share Posted May 22, 2013 http://gridironrats.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/beat_dead_horse2.jpg[img/] How long and in how many threads are we going to debate this? Yessir! Exactly. 1) Live Specimen 2) Dead Specimen 3) A Large Piece Of One (whole head, leg, arm, thorax) That's it. Plain and simple. Way too much controversy surrounds this for anything else to be acceptable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest DWA Posted May 22, 2013 Share Posted May 22, 2013 So, aside from my aborted attempt to take this forum back up a while back, I haven't paid any attention to this stuff in years. I just took the time to read all 15 pages of this thread (I know, I know...) and while it doesn't seem to have elightened me anymore than I was so long ago, it does beg to me to ask, If DWA and dmaker argue in the woods and no one can hear them, do they make a sound? Also: The guy in the cat suit is clearly flipping the photographer the bird with his right hand. Sloppy. Uh-oh. If you aren't liking me vs. dmaker, you might want to leave again. Nothing I can do about that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dmaker Posted May 22, 2013 Share Posted May 22, 2013 Honestly, if me and DWA argue in the woods, and no one hears it....then I am pretty sure that Matt Moneymaker would have to call it a Squatch!! 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest DWA Posted May 22, 2013 Share Posted May 22, 2013 Well, I don't accept the evidence for Matt Moneymaker, so there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
norseman Posted May 22, 2013 Share Posted May 22, 2013 Well, I don't accept the evidence for Matt Moneymaker, so there. Are you saying Matt Moneymaker doesnt exist? *strokes leg hold traps and a box of cupcakes* Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest DWA Posted May 22, 2013 Share Posted May 22, 2013 Go get 'im. I want PROOF, man. I'm just not at all sure that somebody who once seemed to have a level head about this and now finds a squatch in his sink every time he shaves could possibly be real. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest openminded skeptic Posted May 25, 2013 Share Posted May 25, 2013 You might want to start with reading this: http://issuu.com/kristylabardee/docs/paranormal_gestalt_phenomena fantastic reference, but since it is an actual scientific paper i doubt many here will read it. i'll reference a line from the abstract: "Cognitively biasing influences of preexisting psychological tendencies may predispose individuals to specific perceptual and cognitive errors during confrontation of real-world phenomena." to paraphrase: since you think you know where bigfoot lives and what bigfoot looks like, smells like, and behaves like, this bias in decision-making will cause you to see bigfoot anywhere these items appear. this is absolutely the most simple and comprehensive explanation for widespread bigfoot sightings. EDIT: this also explains why everything and everywhere is "squatchy" on Finding Bigfoot I saw a lecture by a skeptic online that touched on this subject (sorry, it was on youtube but I don't remember who the lecturer was), and he presented a good example of this. A Panda cub escaped from a zoo in a Europen city. As soon as the zoo noticed it was missing, they contacted the authorities and sent out information to radio stations, etc. asking people to watch for the panda. However, someone soon discovered the panda laying dead on the railroadtracks right outside the zoo, and the zoo later determined that it had been dead for at least two hours before they had noticed it missing. However it took awhile for the media to get around to broadcasting this latest news. In the meantime dozens of people around the city phoned the police to report their sighting of the missing panda. But of course there was no panda. Some of the "witnesses" may have been pranksters and a few might even have been mentally ill, but the vast majority were probably just people who misidentified something else as a panda simply because they were looking for a panda. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest DWA Posted May 25, 2013 Share Posted May 25, 2013 (edited) OK, first of all, you got the panda story wrong. Second, it isn't even relevant. The animal in question was a lesser panda, in England. This is an animal that can be mistaken by animal tyros for any number of other things - badger; fox; polecat; house cat - and many of the people calling in (as you even note) didn't have any idea the animal had been found. They thought they'd seen something, and they biased toward being helpful. No big, and no relation to this topic whatever. And that paper is bogus, as is any scientific paper that begs the question as part of its central premise. Are all those people mistaken? Really. And one's evidence for that is...? One might want to have some experience in thinking about scientific topics before one comes onto a website and basically insults people that know more. Edited May 25, 2013 by DWA Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts