the parkie Posted January 31, 2014 Share Posted January 31, 2014 Wrong. I was countering YOUR CLAIM, that I had not convinced anyone. You said: I am simply saying, how would I know that I haven't convinced anyone. I was asking you to support your claim that I had not convinced anyone. In post 188 Drew, you said "If I can convince one person....then I have achieved my goal" which suggests to me that you haven't achieved it yet. I also assume you haven't achieved your goal because you are at 2000+ posts and continuing to post. If you knew that you had already convinced at least one person then I suspect that you might have said that you had already achieved your goal and then told us of your new goal. However, it is entirely possible that you have already convinced someone. However, you offer no evidence to show that you have and, not being able to prove a negative, I can show no evidence that you haven't. So, I am not claiming anything, I have just assumed something based on what you have said. If my assumption is wrong, then by all means show me the person or people that you have convinced were experiencing hallucinations and I will say well done to you. None of this means anything in the grand scheme of things though, so I would rather now leave this pointless argument and return to discussing something of actual interest. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drew Posted January 31, 2014 Share Posted January 31, 2014 So once I complete my goal, I have to stop posting? I don't understand what you are saying. Perhaps I had another goal at first, and now my goal has shifted to the current goal? Am I allowed to change my goal? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Urkelbot Posted January 31, 2014 Share Posted January 31, 2014 What would the evidence for changing someone's mind require? Would an audio admission be acceptable or is video needed? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest DWA Posted January 31, 2014 Share Posted January 31, 2014 ^^^Body. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 31, 2014 Share Posted January 31, 2014 OK, and joust a little. I admit, I like a good debate. Not being a premium member severely hurts my ability to debate effectively though. What would the evidence for changing someone's mind require? Would an audio admission be acceptable or is video needed? A body or a living specimen would convince me. Nothing more, nothing less, nothing but. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeZimmer Posted February 1, 2015 Share Posted February 1, 2015 ... Those who are attempting to do scientific things with bigfoot at the moment are pioneers, and pioneers are always scoffed at. So that doesn't surprise me any, and again, I am confident that the wrongs science has allowed towards bigfoot in general will be atoned for sometime in the future. I expect it will happen relatively soon, although it will likely be a matter of years. ... John Bindernagel calls it "premature discovery", and his more recent book is pretty good at explaining that idea. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted February 11, 2015 Share Posted February 11, 2015 Too much skepticism is like overly used salt, each person have to define their own positions to their own personal taste. I suppose that could be said to work both ways … Just saying Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Crowlogic Posted February 13, 2015 Share Posted February 13, 2015 I have no goals regarding a bigoot encounter. Imaginary animals are impossible to meet in the flesh. I enjoy the outdoors, but I don't expect to find a bigfoot out there. If I see something that bigfooters might like or find amusing, I will note it. Like when I shared that sign with the bigoot on it from my hiking trip in the Sierras. But I am not out there "squatchin" by any means. There is absolutely zero disappointment in me in that regard. Accept that or not, it's your choice and makes little difference to me. I tire of the constant claims that skeptics are either afraid of bigfoot or frustrated that we haven't had an encounter or found any evidence. I could stroll over to a park not far from my work that has an urban greenspace with a small lake and a small forest. I have seen at least four obvious stick structures. I could take pics of those and bring them back and people would ooh and ahhh over them and insist that bigfeets made them. Throw in a pic of some poo and I could start climbing the bigfoot ladder and be on my way to a bona fide " voice in the bigfoot community". Thanks, but no thanks. Why you see so much traffic from me is that while I don't contemplate bigfoot as an animal, I do find the social phenomenon rather fascinating. It's like being in a cult, but not having to become a member. I voice my opinion often because I think things like bigfootery, in general, are harmful and promote anti-science agendas and discourage critical thought. Also, to be honest there are personal rivalries that develop and can entice one to weigh in on a topic or respond where I might otherwise not be so inclined. We're human after all Personally, I think it would be great if everyone realized that bifoot is just a social construct and stopped trying to make all the circumstantial evidence create this illusion of an actual beast. But, alas, this will never happen. So I contend myself with countering proponents arguments with my own. This said it about as well as it needs to be said. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts