JDL Posted April 26, 2014 Share Posted April 26, 2014 One should not misidentify anyone who claims that all bigfoot sightings are misidentifications as an authority on the subject. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dmaker Posted April 26, 2014 Share Posted April 26, 2014 (edited) dmaker - Couple different points to make to address that. 1: IF you actually watched the show and paid attention, you'd also remember that there are several witnesses who did not want their faces shown and had their voices disguised. Not everyone who goes on the show is as casual about it as you seem to be suggesting. 2: Two of my friends have been approached by the show's producers and declined because they didn't want the publicity. They now express regret for filing their reports. 3: Not all of those people who went on the show have been threatened with violence by family members who "feel humiliated" by the publicity in the context of something they find embarrassing. I have been. It may all be a big joke to you but it is not a big joke to everyone. MIB 1. I have watched and paid attention. Not very many are disguised at all. But let's drop the number to 300. Happy with that? 2. Two people. Ok, interesting but I'm talking about the number of people on the show that are willing and eager to talk about bigfoot. To mention two people that were not, really is not that important. 3. Well, I'm sorry for you troubles. I find it hard to believe, however, that 300 or more lives have been destroyed by sharing bigfoot stories on TV. One should not misidentify anyone who claims that all bigfoot sightings are misidentifications as an authority on the subject. Who is claiming that? Why must this point be made over and over and over again? Edited April 26, 2014 by dmaker Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted April 26, 2014 Share Posted April 26, 2014 I know several people who live in the Louisville metro area who have had Bigfoot sightings and shared it with others (including me) and a whole more in more rural areas such as Bardstown, Kentucky and Byron, Georgia... To the best of my knowledge none of them suffered these negative reactions alluded to by the True Believersâ„¢. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest LarryP Posted April 26, 2014 Share Posted April 26, 2014 (edited) I'm sorry but your claim that reporting a bigfoot sighting will bring ruin to your life feels more like a myth. That is my point if you care to address it, Apparently you're confused. You're someone who's never had a Class A, B, or C and you don't even believe that BF exists. So it doesn't matter what it "feels" like to you. The reason that a lot of people who make reports wish to remain anonymous is because they don't want their name and location, along with what they witnessed, posted on an online database that can be accessed by the general public. That's not difficult to understand at all. Those people all have neighbors, co-workers, family members, business associates, etc. that all could potentially run across their report just by running a Google search on them. There's nothing new or unusual about people wanting to maintain their privacy. Edited April 26, 2014 by LarryP Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dmaker Posted April 26, 2014 Share Posted April 26, 2014 (edited) What am I confused about Larry? I never said it was difficult to understand. I said that there seem to be plenty of people on Finding Bigfoot, for example, who do not feel the same way do you about this. My point is that there is evidence that this feeling may not be as shared as is being claimed. Edited April 26, 2014 by dmaker Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
roguefooter Posted April 26, 2014 Share Posted April 26, 2014 One should not misidentify anyone who claims that all bigfoot sightings are misidentifications as an authority on the subject. It's Bigfoot, there are no authorities on the subject. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest DWA Posted April 26, 2014 Share Posted April 26, 2014 Good job, gang. I'd have to agree with you: dmaker isn't exactly defending either (1) a position worth defending or (2) one he's defending particularly well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dmaker Posted April 26, 2014 Share Posted April 26, 2014 It's a pretty clear question. You say no one in their right mind would even think about reporting seeing a bigfoot. I have seen a few hundred either do that or raise their hand hoping to do that on national tv. That is pretty simple. How do you explain that given your claim that no one would ever want to do such a thing? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted April 27, 2014 Share Posted April 27, 2014 Those are some very ironic questions coming from you. What makes them ironic? You and a few others seem to think that I think misidentification is only from idiots and that hallucinations are only from mentally ill and that hoaxes are all from liars. I think of myself as a pretty accepting person really. ANYONE can have a hallucination and they are not all mentally ill. A/NYONE can misidentify something, especially if fleetingly seen. Even hoaxers are not necessarily lying. I prank my nieces and nephews all the time and my friends as well. That doesn't make me a liar. There are many reasons for the reports we have and they are not all the same. Distorting your opponents' views with belittling strawmen is far from fair or accurate. There is nothing ironic about asking for evidence of the dangers of reporting bigfoot. If there are dangers, then there would be some examples you could point to. You guys slay me. Drop the crutch. People have far less than zero incentive to report sasquatch sightings. Or else...you can give me all their real names, can't you? Go. Rick Dyer comes to mind Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest DWA Posted April 27, 2014 Share Posted April 27, 2014 (edited) Rick????DYER???????????????? There are fools who will glom onto virtually anything for publicity. What announces them as fools is precisely that. BTW, you still aren't getting the point of this thread. For anyone to think that the encounter reports deserve no scientific scrutiny because, well, you know, people can get stuff wrong simply either haven't read reports, or thought about this much. Edited April 27, 2014 by DWA Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted April 27, 2014 Share Posted April 27, 2014 BTW, you still aren't getting the point of this thread. For anyone to think that the encounter reports deserve no scientific scrutiny because, well, you know, people can get stuff wrong simply either haven't read reports, or thought about this much. And you aren't getting our point. Precisely because human error can lead to misreporting something as a Bigfoot that isn't, eyewitness reports require more thorough examination not less. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest LarryP Posted April 27, 2014 Share Posted April 27, 2014 What am I confused about Larry? You can't describe the scenery if you've never been there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dmaker Posted April 27, 2014 Share Posted April 27, 2014 ^^ That's hardly an answer to the question Larry. There is a claim here that no one would ever want to suffer the consequences of reporting a bigfoot sighting. However, on Finding Bigfoot alone, we have video evidence of several hundred doing that,or waiting in line to do that. So how do you explain that? Respond with all the quips you want, but it does not address the question. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest LarryP Posted April 27, 2014 Share Posted April 27, 2014 I addressed your question as to why a lot of people want to remain anonymous in a very direct and detailed manner upthread. "The reason that a lot of people who make reports wish to remain anonymous is because they don't want their name and location, along with what they witnessed, posted on an online database that can be accessed by the general public. That's not difficult to understand at all. Those people all have neighbors, co-workers, family members, business associates, etc. that all could potentially run across their report just by running a Google search on them." Yes, there are some people who don't care about anonymity. What's your point? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dmaker Posted April 27, 2014 Share Posted April 27, 2014 (edited) I'm not asking you why some people would want to remain anonymous. I am asking why so many would not care about anonymity? When the repercussions of sharing their bigfoot story are so horrible, then why do we have hundreds that don't seem to care at all, in fact are eager to get on TV to share their story? My point is that the claims and statements made here that there is less than zero incentive to report a sighting, that it ruins lives and that you can't even trust your closest relatives after reporting a sighting is not very accurate after all. There is very clear evidence of this as filmed by Finding Bigfoot. Your response is to speculate as to why people would want to be anonymous. But there are hundreds who do not seem to care or be afraid of these most horrible consequences listed by DWA and others. It is a claim that does not hold up to scrutiny and flies in face of the evidence that is quite clearly available to anyone who cares to tune into Finding Bigfoot. My point, Larry, is that the life ruining consequences of reporting a bigfoot does not seem to be as universal as you and others seem to claim. Edited April 27, 2014 by dmaker Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts