Urban Bigfoot, Seriously?

[Guest DWA]

Why would we need a database and scientists to vouch for it? If science isn't interested does that mean it's holds no credibility or value?

 

Where is the information?

 

If you can't show me there is any, guess what?  There isn't.

 

We have scoftics on here saying thousands of eyewitness reports by dead sober people, many of them pillars of the community, consistent, compelling and on the record - are worth nothing.  And that the simple fact that every iota of serious scientific investigation into this question favors the proponents means nothing.

 

And you're just gonna toss that at me and expect me to bite?  Um, no.

 

No evidence for unicorns, until you show me there is.  This is science, ferpetesake.

 

I'm betting that the OP is encountering sasquatch.  I'm betting zero that anyone will ever show me a convincing case for unicorns.

Edited September 12, 2013 by DWA

[dmaker]

" We have scoftics on here saying thousands of eyewitness reports by dead sober people, many of them pillars of the community, consistent, compelling and on the record - are worth nothing."  

 

-Not what I said at all. Please feel free to rewind and correct yourself.

 

 

"I'm betting zero that anyone will ever show me a convincing case for unicorns."

 

I'm betting that no one will ever show the world a Bigfoot either.

[Guest DWA]

Yer flailin', man.  How many times can you post the same thing?

 

What I said you said, you said, and we're done.  Read your own posts!  That's required.  Feel free to rewind and correct yourself - each of the 594 times you said it.

[roguefooter]

If there were a database for Unicorn sightings would it make them any more real? No.

 

There have been thousands of Unicorn sightings over the centuries. What do you think the percentage of misidentifications and hoaxes are? About 100%? That's a pretty big percentage.

 

There have also been thousands of sightings of Mermaids, Jersey Devils, and Fairies. What do they add up to?

 

 

Think about this- whenever the media reports a person missing, thousands of sightings will come in from all over the country. What do you think the percentage of misidentifications and false reports are? Maybe 95-99%? I'll bet most of those people were absolutely positively sure of what they saw- even though they were wrong.

 

There is a perfectly logical reason why skeptics would dismiss anecdotal evidence as being anything of real value.

[Lake County Bigfooot]

Sheri, thank you so much for sharing your experience, I would encourage you to file a sighting report with the BRFO. I have done the same with my experience, and it really helped me when I talked with Stan Courtney, Illinois BRFO investigator. He does not list all the encounters, only sightings like yours, realize that you have been given a rare experience. Those southern forest preserves should be a hotspot each fall, as has been indicated by the dates of other sightings. I will further investigate your sighting on Google Earth. I have a theory that they might migrate to certain areas in the winter, not based on weather, but based on cover and availability of food. I need to work on this theory a bit more and this helps me in linking the puzzle pieces.
 

The heavy weight bout between DWA and Dmaker continues, man you guys are tireless.  Thanks for all the fervor for the topic, even if it was not my intention for the thread.  Hey everyone wants to know what's happening, so your my best advertising.  Dmaker I have spent a fair amount of time in Ontario, Lake of the Woods, and my fishing guides mentioned Sasquatch,  I don't know about northern Ontario,  except one visit to the Woman River area fishing.  I wish I was attune to the subject then as I am now.  I really do not think bigfoot have a huge preference in the type of area they inhabit, allowing it has adequate hiding places and food sources available.  I know that some of the remote fly in camps have had Sasquatch activity.

Edited September 12, 2013 by Lake County Bigfooot

[JDL]

^^ Sorry, but no. I find the claim for the existence of Bigfoot to be unsupported. I feel the evidence is not a mystery. I believe all of it points to one thing--man. I have said this before. Hoaxes, mistakes, etc. But always the same source. Us. Not a giant ape running amok.  So it follows from there that all reports are false for one of many reasons. And yes no matter the source, the consistency and volume.  If there is no Bigfoot, then there are no such things as genuine Bigfoot sighting reports. 

 

Good enough.  I find it unfortunate that you choose this position.

[Guest DWA]

Well, I don't like how every thread gets disrupted by people who aren't properly informed on, or thinking about, the topic.

 

But I've said my piece to dmaker; so if it keeps up it's because he's doing it.

 

Um, back to bigfoot 40 miles from Chi.  Well, do keep us informed.

[Lake County Bigfooot]

To all who have opened this thread I ask you to read my posts that are spread across the last few days in order to get the direction I am shooting for, I know that diversions will be present and that is fine, even welcomed, but I hope some of you will at least entertain some of the research I am proposing, and I really would like to hear how you view the data. It is critical to the development of a theory of how bigfoot adapt to a variety of settings, which I suggest varies based on the amount of contact they have being around humans. Please submit any questions of ideas without regard to ridicule, as there is no such thing as right or wrong in this discussion. So I dare some of you to think outside the box and come up with some new theories.

[Guest DWA]

If there were a database for Unicorn sightings would it make them any more real? No.

 

There have been thousands of Unicorn sightings over the centuries. What do you think the percentage of misidentifications and hoaxes are? About 100%? That's a pretty big percentage.

 

There have also been thousands of sightings of Mermaids, Jersey Devils, and Fairies. What do they add up to?

 

 

Think about this- whenever the media reports a person missing, thousands of sightings will come in from all over the country. What do you think the percentage of misidentifications and false reports are? Maybe 95-99%? I'll bet most of those people were absolutely positively sure of what they saw- even though they were wrong.

 

There is a perfectly logical reason why skeptics would dismiss anecdotal evidence as being anything of real value.

Um, no. 

 

There is no evidence for any of those beings.  Plenty for sasquatch.  Again, don't toss a play number at me.  There is no evidence that those other beings exist, plenty that sasquatch does.  It's all over these boards and the internet.

 

Whether there is evidence or not doesn't make any difference as to a thing's reality.  If unicorns are indeed real, it doesn't matter what we have, or think.

 

But it sure tells us how to bet, which is:  don't bet a plug nickel on any of those others.  But bet heavy on sasquatch.

 

Such is the nature of evidence, and the perception of those who read it correctly.  Way 'tis.

Now can we get back on the topic?  I feel like a shepherd sometimes.  Well, I'm turning off the cattle prod now, because you scoffers have provided more than enough support for my position.

[Lake County Bigfooot]

Gosh, there are so many things about this earth we have yet to discover, a human sized ape was just documented for the first time recently in the Congo, how did this ape avoid being known by science for so long, and only eyewitness reports lead to it's discovery.  Sea la camps you name it, stuff just pops up.  I am sure that mysteries far greater than these exist on this planet.  Science is all about discovery and possibilities, let's keep an open mind about what can or might exist, or how it can exist.

[Guest Darrell]

Well, I don't like how every thread gets disrupted by people who aren't properly informed on, or thinking about, the topic.

 

 

Wow, thats a pretty arrogant position. Arrogance like that usually leaves you open to being proved wrong about what your are so religiously fervent about. It happend to Grover Krantz and it can happen to anyone if you cant keep things in perspective.

[sheri]

LCB, I decided if i was to tell about my sighting, it would be here. I like this forum over bfro. No offense but I don't need to talk to Stan Courtney. I have been dealing with it fine. I think the hardest part for me was my own families disbelief when I told them. I got remarks like " have you been drinking mom ? " Or " have you been smoking wacky weed ?" LOL. Yes I was angry at first. But I had to realize the fact that they didn't see it and it's really hard to believe. Even through all that i couldn't stop talking about it. I saw what I saw and it was amazing. I now have some family member's including my husband who goes out with me. My children pitched in together and for our anniversary got us a finding bigfoot vacation in the smokies. They thought it was funny , and as far as i'm concerned they can keep being funny, we had a great time !  There is in my opinion no place for them to go except south, which is were I think it came from. The kankakee river is a little south of us. Possibly southeast .Why it was here I don't have a clue. I have found prints but only in the early spring and fall. I have some pictures I want to post but I need to use photobucket for them, which I haven't done yet. As soon as I do I will post them.

[roguefooter]

Um, no. 

 

There is no evidence for any of those beings.  Plenty for sasquatch.  Again, don't toss a play number at me.  There is no evidence that those other beings exist, plenty that sasquatch does.  It's all over these boards and the internet.

 

Whether there is evidence or not doesn't make any difference as to a thing's reality.  If unicorns are indeed real, it doesn't matter what we have, or think.

 

But it sure tells us how to bet, which is:  don't bet a plug nickel on any of those others.  But bet heavy on sasquatch.

 

Such is the nature of evidence, and the perception of those who read it correctly.  Way 'tis.

Now can we get back on the topic?  I feel like a shepherd sometimes.  Well, I'm turning off the cattle prod now, because you scoffers have provided more than enough support for my position.

 

I'm a scoffer now huh? That's interesting. Was it because I'm offering an opposing view?

 

The point was that anecdotal evidence is highly fallible- it doesn't matter how much of it there is. It's all highly susceptible to misidentification and hoaxing and that goes for any kind of sighting- not just for Sasquatch. The tangible Sasquatch evidence like the prints and footage are also subject to both misidentification and hoaxing.

 

You can say "no", but that's the reality of it. Especially in a field like this where hoaxing runs rampant.

 

Also it is on topic since we're discussing the validity of sightings. Urban sightings have been reported, but sightings just don't lend any weight to the reality of it. 

Edited September 12, 2013 by roguefooter

[Guest Urkelbot]

Implication's of finding proof of alien civilization is enormous ? And you have made fun of other people on here ?  Where is your proof  ? where is your evidence ?

I said nothing of current proof.

If proof of an alien civilization is found in the future the impact on society and the world in general would be much greater than finding another primate on earth.

[Guest Urkelbot]

If unicorns are proven WE WILL ALL FLY AROUND ON HORNED HORSES THAT CAN SKEWER OUR ENEMIES.

 

There, my grant application.  Until, you know, you have thought about that post a bit. I mean, we have as much proof of unicorns.  People draw pictures of them.

 

(As I've said, with our own ravenous species as the only example we have in the universe, that alien civilization may be the last thing we find.  We'll get much more good out of sasquatch, incalculably more, if evidence on hand is the only criterion. Cures for some of our most persistent diseases are only one thing that could come out of it; an explosion in our knowledge and understanding of our family tree - and thus ourselves - is only one other.)

How is Bigfoot going to aid in curing diseases exactly? Other than being a test subject I suppose.