Jump to content
masterbarber

Olympic Project/ Brown Thermal (Part 2)

Recommended Posts

Cervelo

Com'on John that's pretty low...you know exactly what the purpose of that was....

Clearly demonstrates that a blurry thermal of a cow could look almost identical to the original image..

5EDDD629-E6F8-42DE-8E67-A1A7216D7D2E.jpg

Your argument is a great example of one of these...but not very sciencey for sure, but kinda you know fishy ;)

45FBF30D-9A9B-4809-930B-D8FC36B085D8-732

Edited by Cervelo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

I do not think it demonstrates it well enough to indicate a cow Cerv, not even close, in fact, it furthers the cause that it is probably not a cow. It demonstrates how far some people will go in an attempt to prove they are right. Here let me remind you......

 

 

"Yea but Wheellug, you have to think logically and critically, if you disregard the fact that there is no tracks or sign on the ground, and disregard the fact that you can see the implication of the ridge in the original footage, and completely ignore the back story, and of course make a minor adjustment like cut the head of the cow,then you have a blob that kind of sorta looks like a cow. So from a strictly scientific point of view, it must be cow.

 

 You can't argue with science."

 

 

 I really don't care if you do not think its a Bigfoot, what matters, is, it is not a cow, and it takes no expertise to know that from what is presented here, only common sense. I will take Derek's expert word on tracks and signs over the creative thermal interpretations I keep seeing here....any day of the week.

Edited by JohnC

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Cervelo

I've never said I'm right....I very well could be wrong...but I doubt it...I'm most likley right :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

 This is not a hot water pipe, or wall stud, or even an energy leak we are looking at here Cerv. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Cervelo

Ahhhh I know..it's most likley a cow :)

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

Ok, I edited that before I get reported hahahaha

 

 In my opinion, the critical thinking that has gone into the cow hypothesis does not stand up.

Edited by JohnC

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1980squatch

I had not been here in a few days and I just ended up draining my plusses, on both sides.  Some funny stuff!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
salubrious
Moderator

Com'on John that's pretty low...you know exactly what the purpose of that was....

Clearly demonstrates that a blurry thermal of a cow could look almost identical to the original image..

\

Your argument is a great example of one of these...but not very sciencey for sure, but kinda you know fishy ;)

 

 

I agree with John. Cervelo, your creation of that image did not help your argument at all- it actually hurt it. Here's why- you manipulated the headless cow image with the goal of making it look like the actual image. Despite that goal, it is unconvincing. If you do this again, what you will want to start with is a cow image that, after processing, looks like a person. But, assuming success in that regard, the real test would be to find an image such that it does not need processing to look like the one in the video.

 

In a nutshell, the reason this has gone around in circles for the last 70-80 pages has been that the images of cows presented by the cow camp have not borne a substantial resemblance to the image in the video. Its really that simple- IOW, if its really a cow, then it should be possible to find a cow image that looks like it. That's not happened despite earnest editing of cow images on the part of the cow camp. A reasonable person can only conclude that the reason for that is that the original image is not a cow. Its really that simple.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
DWA

^^^^Anybody who thinks that manipulating a clear image to morph it into a first-generation unexpurgated image is proving a point isn't really thinking hard about how to do this right.

 

This is not about what you want to change things to make everyone think.

 

This is about what the evidence says.

 

And it really is that simple.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1980squatch

This is about what the evidence says.

 

 

MOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
DWA

^^^^I actually think that that was disproven about 75 pages ago.


I actually find it striking how much thinking on this topic isn't driven by evidence.

 

And I can't blame the individuals.

 

The Achilles' heel of Western science is its reliance on cant and canon rather than investigation.  It's why so many remedies long known to aboriginal peoples have been long forgotten (or destroyed with their cultures).  The lives of aborigines are almost totally driven by pure science, which is investigating the unknown.  Western science simply picks up the book and leafs through the book; and if it isn't in the book, it isn't real.  Western "investigation" involves taking one thing you know, combining it with another thing you know...and getting another thing that duh, you now know.  And it is really on display in the cow camp.  And it's not those folks' fault.  It's the way they were raised.

 

"Do you believe in bigfoot?" isn't the question.  But Western science has made that the question, and their simple answer is No.

 

The question is:  what is the explanation for all this consistent evidence?

 

One doesn't get there by monkeying with cow thermals to make them look like monkeys.

 

Remarkable.  Really.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1980squatch

Just trying to keep the thread in the "acceptance of where folks stand/joking around" phase DWA.  We have already had:

 

1. Initial Excitment

2. Analysis

3. Entrenchment

4. Lashing Out

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
DWA

I'd just like to see the Oly Project get more evidence.  Of course, as real people with real lives, they are going to take awhile doing that.  I can wait.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1980squatch

^^^^ and on that, we shall agree 100%.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Cervelo

I agree with John. Cervelo, your creation of that image did not help your argument at all- it actually hurt it. Here's why- you manipulated the headless cow image with the goal of making it look like the actual image. Despite that goal, it is unconvincing. If you do this again, what you will want to start with is a cow image that, after processing, looks like a person. But, assuming success in that regard, the real test would be to find an image such that it does not need processing to look like the one in the video.

In a nutshell, the reason this has gone around in circles for the last 70-80 pages has been that the images of cows presented by the cow camp have not borne a substantial resemblance to the image in the video. Its really that simple- IOW, if its really a cow, then it should be possible to find a cow image that looks like it. That's not happened despite earnest editing of cow images on the part of the cow camp. A reasonable person can only conclude that the reason for that is that the original image is not a cow. Its really that simple.

You got it.....blurried that baby up and hit a home run!!!

Sorry that doesn't work for you guys but its all I really needed to see!

I'd say accept your own challenge..go rent a themal camera don't learn how to use it and keep taking thermal images of cows until you get one that satisfies your objections...I guarantee you will succeed ;)

Or learn how to use the camera and get a clear thermal of a Bigfoot...now that would be awesome!

Balls in your court fellas show me what ya got!!

Edited by Cervelo
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...