Time To Stop Falling For The Distractions. Let The Greatest Minds Discover Bf On This Forum!

[Branco]

Please Branco, if joe schmo killed one, in this day and age, there would be nothing "science" or "MIB's" could do to cover it up.  Kill it, call all news outlets, take pics and upload all over...there's no covering that up.

 

That was not the subject being discussed; it was about turning the "body" over to science. Regardless of what "joe schmo" did to spread the word and photos to the media, the internet or carrying it around in an ice box on a portable Taco stand and show it for a fee, "science" would not accept and classify it.

 

If "joe" actually did that, we would see just how fast and effective a real, old fashioned hoe-down of a cover-up would begin. (Way too many toes and dollars involved to let it slide. They've got it down pat; used it before.)

I am simply trying to flesh out your assertions.......statement from others.

Edited February 14, 2014 by Branco

[Hammer102492]

Hey Delta Zu...forgive me because all I read is your first sentence, and this is my answer,

 

As Jerry sang,

 

"All good things in all good time."

 

Bottom line, that's it.

 

(from the song, "Run for the Roses" Jerry Garcia Band)

[Guest Urkelbot]

Science is not a person or a unified governed body.  There are scientists that study and work in a vast array of fields.  99% of which , just a guess, have no relation to Bigfoot at all.  Most scientists probably give no more thought to the subject of Bigfoot than the Crimean war.  I wouldn't even be surprised if 5-10% or so were open the idea if not believed bigfoot was in fact real, I personally know a few.

The idea that scientists would reject verified DNA evidence or even a body is absurd.  There have been far greater discoveries that upended whole fields of study that were accepted, einsteins relativity for one.  For the most part Bigfoot changes nothing, if discovered, its an apeman or manape that through dumb luck managed to avoid detection for a long time.   If Bigfoot is more Harry potter than Harry Houdini, as some believe, scientists would study that and make some sense out of the underlying principles of Bigfoot magic.  

As to why scientists aren't out there discovering Bigfoot as some won't stop ranting about.  Where's the money? Whos handing out grants for Bigfoot? If the NSF said tomorrow we have 50 million for Bigfoot research most scientists working in a relevant field, to Bigfoot, are going to be staying up all night writing their grant proposal.  No ones calling out the politicians who in the end control the purse strings.

[norseman]

Branco,

You obviously agree with these statements "from others", because you post them here with no commentary of your own to the contrary.

That's your own assertion going on, unless you provide some sort of proof to back it up.

Did you ask the people who told you this how exactly it was suppose to work?

[Sasfooty]

Whether he agrees or disagrees, he isn't obligated to provide proof as to whether these people are right or wrong, OR explain HIS opinion of their beliefs.

 

Looks like it was one of those little bits of information that you can take or leave, according to your taste.

 

But as usual, when information is shared here, the messenger is in danger of being slaughtered.

[WSA]

I take Branco's assertions that some (usually elderly)folks in remote rural areas may anticipate some form of this Saspocalypse Redemption Plan B, as it were, at face value. I'll let Branco say if he believes it, or not. The future we all face will test many assumptions, I've no doubt about that.

 

Norse, you sound like you've learned many valuable skills in your upbringing, which will stand you and yours in good stead. So, let me take a leap here...what did Native cultures learn from observing the habits of Sasquatch? Are we prepared to say they learned nothing? For the most part, this is a rhetorical question, as whatever was communicated is lost in the mist of history, or a closely held secret by Indian cultures.

 

I do think the meme of Sasquatch salvation with the elderly in the deep South cultures is a reflection of the feelings the passing generations have about the loss of survival skills in the younger people. Really, in most places, it is the YOUNG who will suffer the most from the lack of modern amenities. If you travel to the Black Belt of Alabama, as Branco has done, and I have as well, you'll witness a profoundly impoverished culture that is so entrenched it defies you to comprehend it as being part of the U.S. in 2014. Those who do have some semblance of self-sufficiency usually are the children of depression era parents who were taught exactly the kinds of home economy skills Norse mentons. Too many others are more interested in the latest pop-culture offerings and dreams of super-fame, and are high-tailing it to the nearest popluation center as soon as they can do it.    

[norseman]

Whether he agrees or disagrees, he isn't obligated to provide proof as to whether these people are right or wrong, OR explain HIS opinion of their beliefs.

 

Looks like it was one of those little bits of information that you can take or leave, according to your taste.

 

But as usual, when information is shared here, the messenger is in danger of being slaughtered.

I have left it! The idea is absurd!

But that is not the issue, he takes exception to my use of the term "assertion", which in the absence of proof is being used in the proper context here.

I take Branco's assertions that some (usually elderly)folks in remote rural areas may anticipate some form of this Saspocalypse Redemption Plan B, as it were, at face value. I'll let Branco say if he believes it, or not. The future we all face will test many assumptions, I've no doubt about that.

 

Norse, you sound like you've learned many valuable skills in your upbringing, which will stand you and yours in good stead. So, let me take a leap here...what did Native cultures learn from observing the habits of Sasquatch? Are we prepared to say they learned nothing? For the most part, this is a rhetorical question, as whatever was communicated is lost in the mist of history, or a closely held secret by Indian cultures.

 

I do think the meme of Sasquatch salvation with the elderly in the deep South cultures is a reflection of the feelings the passing generations have about the loss of survival skills in the younger people. Really, in most places, it is the YOUNG who will suffer the most from the lack of modern amenities. If you travel to the Black Belt of Alabama, as Branco has done, and I have as well, you'll witness a profoundly impoverished culture that is so entrenched it defies you to comprehend it as being part of the U.S. in 2014. Those who do have some semblance of self-sufficiency usually are the children of depression era parents who were taught exactly the kinds of home economy skills Norse mentons. Too many others are more interested in the latest pop-culture offerings and dreams of super-fame, and are high-tailing it to the nearest popluation center as soon as they can do it.

If we are simply discussing what happens when the light switch doesn't work anymore? I agree whole hearted that most people will be in trouble.......

[Cotter]

"The idea that scientists would reject verified DNA evidence or even a body is absurd."

 

They wouldn't necessarily reject it, some (many?) would indeed falsify or bury the info.  'Scientists' bury or hide info contrary to the agenda of the funding body.  This has been proven in multiple fields, multiple times, over multiple decades.

[Incorrigible1]

"Burying" the most staggering biological find of the past 500 years would take one heck of an agenda. Now where is one of those tinfoil caps?

[JDL]

Still assert that the scientific community's assiduous skepticism regarding extant hominids is based on prejudicial perspectives held over from the universal cultural superstitions established prior to 1000 AD in Europe. 

 

Once cast as supernatural to support the dominant cultural perspective that among manlike beings, only man is natural and good; other purportedly manlike beings were by contrast, and by definition, evil as well as supernatural.  By extension, those who encountered such extant hominids came into contact with evil, and must be suspected of either attracting, inviting, or being under the influence of evil.

 

Today, the scientific community's prevailing attitude carries over these superstitions and prejudices.  Extant hominids have long been considered supernatural, therefore they cannot and do not exist in reality according to accepted scientific BELIEF.  Modern witnesses are no longer viewed as tainted by evil, but are still VIEWED WITH CONTEMPT, and subjective skeptics, cloaked in prevailing scientific BELIEF, originating in SUPERSTITION extend this CONTEMPT to the body of evidence comprising all witness sightings.

 

CONTEMPT and SCIENCE do not mix. 

 

CONTEMPT is an indicator of BELIEF, not TRUTH, and is an indicator of scientific PREJUDICE.

 

PREJUDICE is not OBJECTIVE.  PREJUDICE does not seek TRUTH.  PREJUDICE seeks only to justify itself.

[norseman]

A body would end the debate forever....and whomever tried to take and hide it in the name of a cover up would have a fight on their hands!

[Sasfooty]

CONTEMPT and SCIENCE do not mix. 

 

CONTEMPT is an indicator of BELIEF, not TRUTH, and is an indicator of scientific PREJUDICE.

 

PREJUDICE is not OBJECTIVE.  PREJUDICE does not seek TRUTH.  PREJUDICE seeks only to justify itself.

 

EXCELLENT post, JDL!!!!!!

 

I regret that I could only give you one plus, so I gave you a star in your profile.

[Branco]

A body would end the debate forever....and whomever tried to take and hide it in the name of a cover up would have a fight on their hands!

"A body?" Presented to whom? Have you, or the other prospective body snatchers  made arrangements with a sanctioned lab and had them confirm in writing that they will in fact write and publish a complete report of their findings in a scientific publication after having it peer reviewed, and that they will take the necessary steps to have the "species" taxonomically classified ?

 

Have you taken into account the possibility that the "body" submitted may be found to be a human that has simply not mentally developed to the "civilized" degree as that of the person(s) killing it? In that event, have you or they selected the criminal defense attorneys that will defend you for the actual killing and for the subsequent charges that would accrue after the "fight" against "whomever tried to take and hide it" because it would be the primary evidence in a criminal trial?.

 

Obviously you agree with the assertion that "A body would end the debate forever,," because it was made as a statement of fact by yourself, and not as a second-hand opinion of belief expressed by others, and posted here "with no commentary of your own to the contrary". Without a doubt, "That's your own assertion going on, unless you provide some sort of proof to back it up."

 

"Did YOU ask the people who told you this (A body would end the debate forever--) how exactly it was suppose to work"?

 

So, as the Ole Granny asked. "Where the beef?"

[Guest Urkelbot]

Still assert that the scientific community's assiduous skepticism regarding extant hominids is based on prejudicial perspectives held over from the universal cultural superstitions established prior to 1000 AD in Europe. 

 

Once cast as supernatural to support the dominant cultural perspective that among manlike beings, only man is natural and good; other purportedly manlike beings were by contrast, and by definition, evil as well as supernatural.  By extension, those who encountered such extant hominids came into contact with evil, and must be suspected of either attracting, inviting, or being under the influence of evil.

 

Today, the scientific community's prevailing attitude carries over these superstitions and prejudices.  Extant hominids have long been considered supernatural, therefore they cannot and do not exist in reality according to accepted scientific BELIEF.  Modern witnesses are no longer viewed as tainted by evil, but are still VIEWED WITH CONTEMPT, and subjective skeptics, cloaked in prevailing scientific BELIEF, originating in SUPERSTITION extend this CONTEMPT to the body of evidence comprising all witness sightings.

 

CONTEMPT and SCIENCE do not mix. 

 

CONTEMPT is an indicator of BELIEF, not TRUTH, and is an indicator of scientific PREJUDICE.

 

PREJUDICE is not OBJECTIVE.  PREJUDICE does not seek TRUTH.  PREJUDICE seeks only to justify itself.

Scientists, and laypersons, who don't think it likely Bigfoot is a biological animal/man/lemurian do so because they aren't satisfied with the current evidence.  Those who think scientists are ignorant on the subject may even be correct and if they simply read all the evidence/reports would change their opinions and thoughts on the matter. That's all it's not contempt or prejudice.  If new definitive testable evidence came out tomorrow most if not all would change their opinions on the subject.

 I am not sure why this concept is so hard to understand.

[norseman]

"A body?" Presented to whom? Have you, or the other prospective body snatchers  made arrangements with a sanctioned lab and had them confirm in writing that they will in fact write and publish a complete report of their findings in a scientific publication after having it peer reviewed, and that they will take the necessary steps to have the "species" taxonomically classified ?

 

Have you taken into account the possibility that the "body" submitted may be found to be a human that has simply not mentally developed to the "civilized" degree as that of the person(s) killing it? In that event, have you or they selected the criminal defense attorneys that will defend you for the actual killing and for the subsequent charges that would accrue after the "fight" against "whomever tried to take and hide it" because it would be the primary evidence in a criminal trial?.

 

Obviously you agree with the assertion that "A body would end the debate forever,," because it was made as a statement of fact by yourself, and not as a second-hand opinion of belief expressed by others, and posted here "with no commentary of your own to the contrary". Without a doubt, "That's your own assertion going on, unless you provide some sort of proof to back it up."

 

"Did YOU ask the people who told you this (A body would end the debate forever--) how exactly it was suppose to work"?

 

So, as the Ole Granny asked. "Where the beef?"

 

LOL............apples and apples and all that huh? This makes YOUR assertion (that upon the collapse of civilization that Sasquatches are going to start a back to nature nursing home) on a equal playing field as mine?

 

A) Yes.

 

B ) Yes.

 

C) 

 

http://www.bigfootlunchclub.com/2010/01/smithsonians-formal-reply-letter-to.html

 

While most scientists believe the likelihood of the existence of such a creature is small, they keep an open mind as scientists should. One cannot prove anything on the basis of negative evidence, and the only satisfactory proof that an animal fitting the description of the "snowman" exists would be either to capture one and study it or to find undisputed skeletal evidence. Only these kinds of finds would result in the universal recognition of the "snowman" by all scientists.

 

This is what you would call backing up your assertions with FACTS..........you should try it sometime!!! 

 

Unlike DNA, which in most cases the test destroys the evidence...........a body or a portion there of can be tested again and again and again for DNA. On top of that they can study morphology depending on the percentage of the organism present.

 

You better start performing the Heimlich on ole granny.............she is choking.

 

Added: I may go to jail for manslaughter..........but it's still a win for the Sasquatch species, if the body is the primary evidence in a criminal case. 

Edited February 14, 2014 by norseman