Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
norseman

Patty's Calf And Tricep

Recommended Posts

Cotter

Thank you for great explanation  and the link.  I am also glad you understand my position.  i am a scientist.  No specimen  . No proof.  God bless.

 

I was a bit curious by this statement.

SO, we can assume you do not believe in black holes then?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Urkelbot

The black hole analogy is a bad one. The only way it would work is if people had been living alL across the galaxy and yet still hadn't found an actual black hole just evidence of them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Cotter

I don't think it's a bad analogy at all.

 

If one believes in black holes, then the belief would stem from something other than ACTUALLY having a black hole to study, but rather based on measurable evidence of one.

His statement was 'no specimen, no proof'....so we don't have a black hole 'specimen', do we?  One that can be studied, with repeatable tests?

Perhaps though, I didn't infer properly that he/she meant "for me to believe an animal exists, we need to have a specimen".....

 

I suppose then I would have asked why the different criteria.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest OntarioSquatch

Evidence of black holes can't be faked though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Urkelbot

Currently there is no reason to think black holes don't exist based upon the current findings of modern science. There is a pretty large reason to assume Bigfoot doesn't exist which is why most scientists and people don't believe.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ThePhaige

I disagree and feel the black hole analogy is a good example...science only apply the rules of rigor when it is a theory that opposed their already supposed accepted theories. Placing a unquestionable faith is science is a mistake in my opinion. My feelings are that everyone has their price and that lying does not have to be coerced from people with threats...although that will work as well ultimately. My discernment is that SSq is unquestionably real, not only because I have encountered it, but because the blatant attempts to block the possibilities and place just enough doubt in the minds of the masses. This is larger than just another undocumented species which is why I am certain science and the powers that be know exactly what they are and would rather perpetuate the subterfuge of that reality. Me thinks if science attacked the subject with the same zeal as say the black hole analogy we would see SSq as being just a faithfully accepted just as some of the other preposterous theories science has had us chewing on and believing as being fact. In fact there is much more circumstantial evidence of SSq than of black holes every day of the week.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Urkelbot

It always comes back to conspiracy theories around here it seems.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
wiiawiwb

Thank you for great explanation  and the link.  I am also glad you understand my position.  i am a scientist.  No specimen  . No proof.  God bless.

I get a real kick out of people claiming to be scientists who strut around like a peacock that hasn't mated in years.  Scientists are like funeral directors and morticians. They conduct their lives looking in the rear-view mirror. They come in after the heavy lifting has been done. It's the people, and researchers, out in the field trying to make things happen that I applaud.

 

Scientists always claim that nothing will satisfy the scientific community short of a body being brought to the table. Speaking of bringing something to the table, it's the researchers in the field whose tireless efforts will bring a body to the table, not the nerds with coke-bottle eyeglasses and white coats who await its arrival munching on donuts and sipping coffee.

 

By the time a body does comes to the table, the result will already be known. The scientists then gets to play in their little sandbox, after the horse has left the barn, and dislocate their shoulders showering themselves with backslaps and accolades.

Edited by wiiawiwb
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
norseman

I've never understood the hatred science receives around here.........with out science and scientists? We are back to living in small villages with superstitions and blood letting.

 

Scientists should not be made to go into the jungle to wrestle anacondas. Their work is in the lab.........and I cannot do it for them. But I can go wrestle anacondas.........

 

Win/win

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
wiiawiwb

The why is easy.

 

If scientists simply viewed themselves as members of a team, and acknowledged it was the collective efforts of everyone on the team that will finally resolve the answer to this mystery, then no one would ever complain. Rather, what we have are some people who think they have exalted status and demean and degrade the efforts of those in the field. They sit upon their throne and claim to decide for everyone else whether evidence is evidence.

 

Nothing can be elevated to acceptance, not even items of evidence, until they put their lofty seal of approval on it.  Rubbish. That heralded seal will be duly etched forever when the body is found and no scientist will be needed to confirm that.

 

By the way, when I speak of "scientists" I am addressing only those in the field of bigfootery not those discovering cures for cancer.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
SweatyYeti

I've never understood the hatred science receives around here.........with out science and scientists? We are back to living in small villages with superstitions and blood letting.

 

Scientists should not be made to go into the jungle to wrestle anacondas. Their work is in the lab.........and I cannot do it for them. But I can go wrestle anacondas.........

 

Win/win

 

 

A scientist's work area extends well beyond just the 'lab', Norseman... :)  'Science' is done primarily in the mind. Albert Einstein was a great example of that. Also, 'science' is being done by Bill, Giganto, Pat, Xspider, Comncents, myself and others here on this Forum.

 

I agree with what Wiia is saying....I think that trained/professional Scientists have some obligation to acknowledge scientific work/analysis which may fall short of 'hard proof'....simply because they have the smarts to understand that type of evidence.

Edited by SweatyYeti
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ThePhaige

It always comes back to conspiracy theories around here it seems.

 

Well I try not to deal in absolutes like always and never...but to answer your question...frequently yes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Urkelbot

If there was more to work with than a 46 year old video, eyewitness reports, and tracks, all of which could be false more scientists would be interested.

DNA or consistent quality photographs would interest more scientists and possibly government agencies or corporations. Until then the absence of evidence far outweighs the current evidence in most minds.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
wiiawiwb

I beg to differ with everything you said in your post.

Edited by wiiawiwb

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Urkelbot

Its a rationale for why scientists generally don't believe in Bigfoot or engage in research pertaining to Bigfoot.

You disagree with the notion that the absence of hard evidence for the existence of Bigfoot leads scientists, and most Americans, to not believe?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...